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:	Mon, 26 Oct 2015 14:42:57 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To:	Hongjie Fang (方洪杰) 
	<Hongjie.Fang@...eadtrum.com>
cc:	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 4.3-rc6] proc: fix convert from oom_score_adj to
 oom_adj

On Thu, 22 Oct 2015, Hongjie Fang (方洪杰) wrote:

> 
> The oom_adj has been replaced by oom_score_adj in kernel,
> but the /proc/pid/oom_adj is provided for legacy purposes.
> When write/read a value into/from /proc/pid/oom_adj,
> there is a transformation between oom_adj and oom_score_adj.
> 
> After writing a new value into /proc/pid/oom_adj, then read it.
> The return value is a different value than you wrote.
> Fix this by adding a adjustment factor.
> 

You're only looking at the output and seeing that it disagrees with what 
was written and ignoring _why_ it disagrees.

It's because, as I already stated, oom_score_adj is the effective tunable 
for oom kill process prioritization and the legacy oom_adj had a different 
scale where a 1:1 mapping is not possible.

All throughout the kernel, we report the effective value.  We accept 
writes and the reads report the effective value.  This is no different.

Nack again.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ