| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 21:26:57 -0700 From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> To: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com> Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm] throttle direct reclaim when too many pages are isolated already (v3) On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 00:09:05 -0400 Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com> wrote: > > If we were to step back and approach this in a broader fashion, perhaps > > we would find some commonality with the existing TIF_MEMDIE handling, > > dunno. > > Good point - what is it that makes TIF_MEMDIE special > wrt. other fatal signals, anyway? > > I wonder if we should not simply "help along" any task > with fatal signals pending, anywhere in the VM (and maybe > other places in the kernel, too). > > The faster we get rid of a killed process, the sooner its > resources become available to the other processes. Spose so. Are their any known (or makeable uppable) situations in which such a change would be beneficial? Maybe if the system is in a hopeless swapstorm and someone is killing processes in an attempt to get control back. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists