linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] oom-kill: give the dying task a higher priority

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 27 May 2010 20:33:19 +0200
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	"Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lclaudio@...g.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>, williams@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] oom-kill: give the dying task a higher priority

On 05/27, Luis Claudio R. Goncalves wrote:
>
> It sounds plausible giving the dying task an even higher priority to be
> sure it will be scheduled sooner and free the desired memory.

As usual, I can't really comment the changes in oom logic, just minor
nits...

> @@ -413,6 +415,8 @@ static void __oom_kill_task(struct task_struct *p, int verbose)
>  	 */
>  	p->rt.time_slice = HZ;
>  	set_tsk_thread_flag(p, TIF_MEMDIE);
> +	param.sched_priority = MAX_RT_PRIO-1;
> +	sched_setscheduler(p, SCHED_FIFO, &param);
>
>  	force_sig(SIGKILL, p);

Probably sched_setscheduler_nocheck() makes more sense.

Minor, but perhaps it would be a bit better to send SIGKILL first,
then raise its prio.

Oleg.

--
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/