[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131113174220.GQ21461@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:42:20 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
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: Re: oom-kill && frozen()
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 06:07:24PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> 4. Finally, change try_to_wake_up() path to do
>
> - p->state = TASK_WAKING;
> + p->state &= ~state;
> + if (p->state & ~(TASK_DEAD | TASK_WAKEKILL | TASK_PARKED))
> + return;
> + else
> + p->state = TASK_WAKING;
>
> IOW, if the task sleeps in, say, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE | __TASK_FROZEN
> then it need both try_to_wake_up(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE) and
> try_to_wake_up(__TASK_FROZEN) to wake up.
> Tejun, Peter, do you think this makes any sense? I am just curious, but
> "selective wakeup" looks potentially useful.
I've never looked at any of this freeze stuff, so I cannot comment too
much. However we should be very careful not to add too much to relative
hot paths for the relative rare case of freezing stuff.
--
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