On Tue, 8 Mar 2011 15:57:36 -0800 (PST)
David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > @@ -324,7 +324,7 @@ static struct task_struct *select_bad_process(unsigned int *ppoints,
> > > > * the process of exiting and releasing its resources.
> > > > * Otherwise we could get an easy OOM deadlock.
> > > > */
> > > > - if (thread_group_empty(p) && (p->flags & PF_EXITING) && p->mm) {
> > > > + if ((p->flags & PF_EXITING) && p->mm) {
> >
> > The previous check was not perfect, we know this.
> >
> > But with this patch applied, the simple program below disables oom-killer
> > completely. select_bad_process() can never succeed.
> >
>
> The program illustrates a problem that shouldn't be fixed in
> select_bad_process() but rather in oom_kill_process() when choosing an
> eligible child of the selected task to kill in place of its parent.
If Oleg's test program cause a hang with
oom-prevent-unnecessary-oom-kills-or-kernel-panics.patch and doesn't
cause a hang without
oom-prevent-unnecessary-oom-kills-or-kernel-panics.patch then that's a
big problem for
oom-prevent-unnecessary-oom-kills-or-kernel-panics.patch, no?
--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>