linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] oom: avoid killing init if it assume the oom killed thread's mm

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:	Wed, 25 Sep 2013 10:56:58 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To:	Ming Liu <ming.liu@...driver.com>
cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mhocko@...e.cz, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
	hannes@...xchg.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] oom: avoid killing init if it assume the oom killed
 thread's mm

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 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/