> Andrew, please drop > > signals-introduce-send_sigkill-helper.patch > > I am stupid. > > On 06/10, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > > Cleanup, no functional changes. > > > > There are a lot of buggy SIGKILL users in kernel. For example, almost > > every force_sig(SIGKILL) is wrong. force_sig() is not safe, it assumes > > that the task has the valid ->sighand, and in general it should be used > > only for synchronous signals. send_sig(SIGKILL, p, 1) or > > send_xxx(SEND_SIG_FORCED/SEND_SIG_PRIV) is not right too but this is not > > immediately obvious. > > > > The only way to correctly send SIGKILL is send_sig_info(SEND_SIG_NOINFO) > > No, SEND_SIG_NOINFO doesn't work too. Oh, can't understand what I was > thinking about. current is the random task, but send_signal() checks > if the caller is from-parent-ns. > > > Note: we need more cleanups here, this is only the first change. > > We need the cleanups first. Until then oom-killer has to use force_sig() > if we want to kill the SIGNAL_UNKILLABLE tasks too. This definitely needed. OOM-Killer is not racist ;) Thanks. -- 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>