On 04/06, anfei wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 08:32:16PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > select_bad_process() checks PF_EXITING to detect the task which
> > is going to release its memory, but the logic is very wrong.
> >
> > - a single process P with the dead group leader disables
> > select_bad_process() completely, it will always return
> > ERR_PTR() while P can live forever
> >
> > - if the PF_EXITING task has already released its ->mm
> > it doesn't make sense to expect it is goiing to free
> > more memory (except task_struct/etc)
> >
> > Change the code to ignore the PF_EXITING tasks without ->mm.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >
> > mm/oom_kill.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > --- MM/mm/oom_kill.c~2_FIX_PF_EXITING 2010-04-02 18:51:05.000000000 +0200
> > +++ MM/mm/oom_kill.c 2010-04-02 18:58:37.000000000 +0200
> > @@ -322,7 +322,7 @@ static struct task_struct *select_bad_pr
> > * the process of exiting and releasing its resources.
> > * Otherwise we could get an easy OOM deadlock.
> > */
> > - if (p->flags & PF_EXITING) {
> > + if ((p->flags & PF_EXITING) && p->mm) {
>
> Even this check is satisfied, it still can't say p is a good victim or
> it will release memory automatically if multi threaded, as the exiting
> of p doesn't mean the other threads are going to exit, so the ->mm won't
> be released.
Yes, completely agreed.
Unfortunately I forgot to copy this into the changelog, but when I
discussed this change I mentioned "still not perfect, but much better".
I do not really know what is the "right" solution. Even if we fix this
check for mt case, we also have CLONE_VM tasks.
So, this patch just tries to improve things, to avoid the easy-to-trigger
false positives.
Oleg.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>