On Thu 07-12-17 18:52:23, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > On (12/06/17 11:20), Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > Slab shrinkers can be quite time consuming and when signal > > is pending they can delay handling of the signal. If fatal > > signal is pending there is no point in shrinking that process > > since it will be killed anyway. This change checks for pending > > fatal signals inside shrink_slab loop and if one is detected > > terminates this loop early. > > > > Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > mm/vmscan.c | 7 +++++++ > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c > > index c02c850ea349..69296528ff33 100644 > > --- a/mm/vmscan.c > > +++ b/mm/vmscan.c > > @@ -486,6 +486,13 @@ static unsigned long shrink_slab(gfp_t gfp_mask, int nid, > > .memcg = memcg, > > }; > > > > + /* > > + * We are about to die and free our memory. > > + * Stop shrinking which might delay signal handling. > > + */ > > + if (unlikely(fatal_signal_pending(current)) > > - if (unlikely(fatal_signal_pending(current)) > + if (unlikely(fatal_signal_pending(current))) Heh, well, spotted. This begs a question how this has been tested, if at all? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
