[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1004071929090.3586@i5.linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 19:33:01 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
cc: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>,
sgunderson@...foot.com, hannes@...xchg.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2] rmap: make anon_vma_prepare link in all the anon_vmas
of a mergeable VMA
On Thu, 8 Apr 2010, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
>
> Now pagefault don't insert anon_vma anymore, right? if so, SIGBUS is better.
> Now SIGBUS and VM_FAULT_OOM make different result.
>
> SIGBUS -> kill current task
> VM_FAULT_OOM -> invoke oom-killer (see pagefault_out_of_memory())
Yeah, maybe VM_FAULT_SIGBUS works ok instead of VM_FAULT_OOM. But the
cause of it is the system having been oom when themappign was created, so
I think either is fine.
> If current task can't recover proper anon_vma. we should just kill current
> instead random highest badness process. otherwise !anon_vma process continue
> to randomly invoke oom-killer.
Yes, that is a good point.
Anyway, I think it might be interesting to test my anon_vma_prepare()
locking change patch together with Rik's _first_ version of his "fix
anon_vma_prepare" thing (the one without the spinlock). They should apply
independently of each other, and maybe it all even works together.
Linus
--
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