linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] oom: Do not invoke oom notifiers on sysrq+f

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.2.10.1507151521250.3514@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date:	Wed, 15 Jul 2015 15:21:46 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To:	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
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 Wed, 15 Jul 2015, Michal Hocko wrote:

> > > 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.
> > > 
> > 
> > Agreed.
> 
> In such a case it would be still good to fix the bug fixed by this
> patch.
> 

It's fixed if you follow the suggestion of moving the oom notification out 
of the oom killer where it doesn't belong.
--
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/