On 05/27, Luis Claudio R. Goncalves wrote: > > It sounds plausible giving the dying task an even higher priority to be > sure it will be scheduled sooner and free the desired memory. As usual, I can't really comment the changes in oom logic, just minor nits... > @@ -413,6 +415,8 @@ static void __oom_kill_task(struct task_struct *p, int verbose) > */ > p->rt.time_slice = HZ; > set_tsk_thread_flag(p, TIF_MEMDIE); > + param.sched_priority = MAX_RT_PRIO-1; > + sched_setscheduler(p, SCHED_FIFO, ¶m); > > force_sig(SIGKILL, p); Probably sched_setscheduler_nocheck() makes more sense. Minor, but perhaps it would be a bit better to send SIGKILL first, then raise its prio. 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>