On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 13:05:59 +0200, Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon 26-09-11 19:58:50, Rusty Russell wrote: > > On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 10:28:37 +0200, Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Fri 26-08-11 11:13:40, David Rientjes wrote: > > > > I'd love to be able to do a thaw on a PF_FROZEN task in the oom killer > > > > followed by a SIGKILL if that task is selected for oom kill without an > > > > heuristic change. Not sure if that's possible, so we'll wait for Rafael > > > > to chime in. > > > > > > We have discussed that with Rafael and it should be safe to do that. See > > > the patch bellow. > > > The only place I am not entirely sure about is run_guest > > > (drivers/lguest/core.c). It seems that the code is able to cope with > > > signals but it also calls lguest_arch_run_guest after try_to_freeze. > > > > Yes; if you want to kill things in the refrigerator(), then will a > > > > if (cpu->lg->dead || task_is_dead(current)) > > break; > > > > Work? > > The task is not dead yet. We should rather check for pending signals. > Can we just move try_to_freeze up before the pending signals check? Yep, that works. Acked-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Cheers, Rusty. -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>