On 10/19/2012 02:06 AM, David Rientjes wrote: > On Thu, 18 Oct 2012, Glauber Costa wrote: > >>> Do we actually need to test PF_KTHREAD when current->mm == NULL? >>> Perhaps because of aio threads whcih temporarily adopt a userspace mm? >> >> I believe so. I remember I discussed this in the past with David >> Rientjes and he advised me to test for both. >> > > PF_KTHREAD can do use_mm() to assume an ->mm but hopefully they aren't > allocating slab while doing so. Have you considered actually charging > current->mm->owner for that memory, though, since the kthread will have > freed the memory before unuse_mm() or otherwise have charged it on behalf > of a user process, i.e. only exempting PF_KTHREAD? > I always charge current->mm->owner. -- 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>