linux-kernel - Re: cc1plus invoked oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x280da, order=0, 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: <20091105080656.54CE.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Thu,  5 Nov 2009 08:20:24 +0900 (JST)
From:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com,
	Justin Mattock <justinmattock@...il.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	gcc@....gnu.org, David Rientjes <rientjes@...washington.edu>
Subject: Re: cc1plus invoked oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x280da, order=0, oom_adj=0

> > +	if (verbose) {
> > +		task_lock(p);
> 
> We need to be careful with which locks we take on the oom-killer path,
> because it can be called by code which already holds locks.  But I
> expect task_lock() will be OK.

Sure.
task_lock() is already used various oom path. I think this is ok.



--
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/