linux-kernel - Re: [Bug #13058] First hibernation attempt fails

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

Message-ID: <20090422130705.GA16186@elf.ucw.cz>
Date:	Wed, 22 Apr 2009 15:07:05 +0200
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, jens.axboe@...cle.com,
	alan-jenkins@...fmail.co.uk, rjw@...k.pl,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Bug #13058] First hibernation attempt fails

Hi!

> Of course, this will protect the calling task from getting oom-killed. 
> But it doesn't protect other tasks from getting oom-killed due to the
> activity of _this_ task.
> 
> But I think that problem already exists, and that this proposal doesn't
> worsen anything, yes?
> 
> Or is it the case that all other tasks are safely stuck in the freezer
> at this time, so they won't be allocating any memory anyway?

That is the idea, yes. ... but we now have more threads that are not
freezable... so they may allocate the memory.

Is it non-feasible to free memory without really going and allocating
everything?

									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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/