| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20150710074032.GA7343@dhcp22.suse.cz> Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 09:40:32 +0200 From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> To: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Jakob Unterwurzacher <jakobunt@...il.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] oom: Do not invoke oom notifiers on sysrq+f On Thu 09-07-15 14:07:37, David Rientjes wrote: > On Thu, 9 Jul 2015, Michal Hocko wrote: [...] > > So I am not > > sure it belongs outside of the oom killer proper. > > > > Umm it has nothing to do with oom killing, it quite obviously doesn't > belong in the oom killer. The naming of the API would disagree. To me register_oom_notifier sounds like a mechanism to be notified when we are oom. > It belongs prior to invoking the oom killer if memory could be freed. Shrinkers are there to reclaim and prevent from OOM. This API is a gray zone. It looks generic method for the notification yet it allows to prevent from oom killer. I can imagine somebody might abuse this interface to implement OOM killer policies. Anyway, I think it would be preferable to kill it altogether rather than play with its placing. It will always be a questionable API. [...] -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- 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