[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131112165643.GA31278@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 17:56:43 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: oom-kill && frozen()
On 11/12, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> I am also wondering if it makes any sense to turn PF_FROZEN into
> TASK_FROZEN, something like (incomplete, probably racy) patch below.
> Note that it actually adds the new state, not the the qualifier.
As for the current usage of PF_FROZEN... David, it seems that
oom_scan_process_thread()->__thaw_task() is dead? Probably this
was fine before, when __thaw_task() cleared the "need to freeze"
condition, iirc it was PF_FROZEN.
But today __thaw_task() can't help, no? the task will simply
schedule() in D state again.
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