| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 10:17:28 +0900 From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com> To: rientjes@...gle.com CC: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, caiqian@...hat.com, hughd@...gle.com, kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com, minchan.kim@...il.com, oleg@...hat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] oom: don't kill random process > I'm afraid that a second time through the tasklist in select_bad_process() > is simply a non-starter for _any_ case; it significantly increases the > amount of time that tasklist_lock is held and causes problems elsewhere on > large systems -- such as some of ours -- since irqs are disabled while > waiting for the writeside of the lock. I think it would be better to use > a proportional privilege for root processes based on the amount of memory > they are using (discounting 1% of memory per 10% of memory used, as > proposed earlier, seems sane) so we can always protect root when necessary > and never iterate through the list again. > > Please look into the earlier review comments on the other patches, refresh > the series, and post it again. Thanks! Never mind. You never see to increase tasklist_lock. You never seen all processes have root privilege case. -- 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