linux-kernel - Re: + mm-invoke-oom-killer-from-page-fault.patch added to -mm tree

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20081022062802.GF651@elte.hu>
Date:	Wed, 22 Oct 2008 08:28:02 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc:	mm-commits@...r.kernel.org, npiggin@...e.de, jdike@...toit.com,
	tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: + mm-invoke-oom-killer-from-page-fault.patch added to -mm tree


* akpm@...ux-foundation.org <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> 
> The patch titled
>      mm: invoke oom-killer from page fault
> has been added to the -mm tree.  Its filename is
>      mm-invoke-oom-killer-from-page-fault.patch
> 
> Before you just go and hit "reply", please:
>    a) Consider who else should be cc'ed
>    b) Prefer to cc a suitable mailing list as well
>    c) Ideally: find the original patch on the mailing list and do a
>       reply-to-all to that, adding suitable additional cc's
> 
> *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
> 
> See http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/added-to-mm.txt to find
> out what to do about this
> 
> The current -mm tree may be found at http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/mmotm/
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Subject: mm: invoke oom-killer from page fault
> From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
> 
> Rather than have the pagefault handler kill a process directly if it gets
> a VM_FAULT_OOM, have it call into the OOM killer.
> 
> With increasingly sophisticated oom behaviour (cpusets, memory cgroups,
> oom killing throttling, oom priority adjustment or selective disabling,
> panic on oom, etc), it's silly to unconditionally kill the faulting
> process at page fault time.  Create a hook for pagefault oom path to call
> into instead.
> 
> Only converted x86 and uml so far.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
> Cc: Jeff Dike <jdike@...toit.com>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>

the x86 bits look sane in principle. Needs a lot of testing obviously.

Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>

a small nit:

> +	/*
> +	 * Give "p" a good chance of killing itself before we
> +	 * retry to allocate memory unless "p" is current
> +	 */
> +	if (!test_thread_flag(TIF_MEMDIE))
> +		schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(1);

comment does not match up the code anymore, we only deal with 'current' 
here.

	Ingo
--
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/