[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100406133847.GA10039@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 15:38:47 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: anfei <anfei.zhou@...il.com>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm 2/4] oom: select_bad_process: PF_EXITING check
should take ->mm into account
On 04/06, anfei wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 06, 2010 at 02:18:11PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > I do not really know what is the "right" solution. Even if we fix this
> > check for mt case, we also have CLONE_VM tasks.
> >
> What about checking mm->mm_users too? If there are any other users,
> just let badness judge. CLONE_VM tasks but not mt seem rare, and
> badness doesn't consider it too.
Even if we forget about get_task_mm() which increments mm_users, it is not
clear to me how to do this check correctly.
Say, mm_users > 1 but SIGNAL_GROUP_EXIT is set. This means this process is
exiting and (ignoring CLONE_VM task) it is going to release its ->mm. But
otoh mm can be NULL.
Perhaps we can do
if ((PF_EXITING && thread_group_empty(p) ||
(p->signal->flags & SIGNAL_GROUP_EXIT) {
// OK, it is exiting
bool has_mm = false;
do {
if (t->mm) {
has_mm = true;
break;
}
} while_each_thread(p, t);
if (!has_mm)
continue;
if (p != current)
return ERR_PTR(-1);
...
}
I dunno.
Oleg.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists