linux-kernel - Re: oomkillers gone wild.

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: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1206091914560.7832@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date:	Sat, 9 Jun 2012 19:15:45 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
cc:	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: oomkillers gone wild.

On Fri, 8 Jun 2012, Thomas Gleixner wrote:

> > If we're leaking task_struct's, meaning that put_task_struct() isn't 
> > actually freeing them when the refcount goes to 0, then it's certainly not 
> > because of the oom killer which only sends a SIGKILL to the selected 
> > process.
> 
> I rather suspect, that this is a asymetry between get_ and
> put_task_struct and refcount just doesn't go to zero.
> 

We found an actual task_struct leak within put_task_struct() because of 
the free task notifiers during the 3.4 -rc cycle, so if kmemleak doesn't 
show anything then would it be possible to bisect the problem Dave?
--
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/