On Thu 23-06-16 20:52:21, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > On 06/23, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 10:03 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Let me quote my previous email ;) > > > > > > And we can't free/nullify it when the parent/debuger reaps a zombie, > > > say, mark_oom_victim() expects that get_task_struct() protects > > > thread_info as well. > > > > > > probably we can fix all such users though... > > > > TIF_MEMDIE is indeed a potential problem, but I don't think > > mark_oom_victim() is actually problematic. > > > > mark_oom_victim() is called with either "current", > > This is no longer true in -mm tree. > > But I agree, this is fixable (and in fact I still hope TIF_MEMDIE will die, > at least in its current form). We can move the flag to the task_struct. There are still some bits left there. This would be trivial so that the oom usage doesn't stay in the way. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
