On Wed, 25 Sep 2013, Ming Liu wrote: > > We shouldn't be selecting a process where mm == init_mm in the first > > place, so this wouldn't fix the issue entirely. > > But if we add a control point for "mm == init_mm" in the first place(ie. in > oom_unkillable_task), that would forbid the processes sharing mm with init to > be selected, is that reasonable? Actually my fix is just to protect init > process to be killed for its vfork child being selected and I think it's the > only place where there is the risk. If my understanding is wrong, pls correct > me. > We never want to select a process where task->mm == init_mm because if we kill it we won't free any memory, regardless of vfork(). The goal of the oom killer is solely to free memory, so it always tries to avoid needless killing. -- 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>