linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] copy over oom

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]

Message-ID: <6599ad830907211303m25141938kcb75065a74a40ee2@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 21 Jul 2009 13:03:18 -0700
From:	Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>
To:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mel@....ul.ie, npiggin@...e.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] copy over oom_adj value at fork time

On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 1:00 PM, David Rientjes<rientjes@...gle.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Jul 2009, Paul Menage wrote:
>
>> Agreed, but the same livelock can be fixed in ways that don't break
>> the API. (E.g. check for the victim being OOM_DISABLED in
>> select_bad_process() when we find a new "worst" candidate).
>>
>
> And allow /proc/pid-of-child/oom_score to represent a possible candidate
> (and, additionally, a hint at the oom killing priority) when it really
> isn't?
>

It's the API that's existed for years with no complaints, AFAICS.

Paul
--
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/