linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH -v2] mm, oom: introduce oom reaper

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]

Date:	Tue, 8 Dec 2015 07:19:42 +0900
From:	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To:	mhocko@...nel.org
Cc:	linux-mm@...ck.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, mgorman@...e.de,
	rientjes@...gle.com, riel@...hat.com, hughd@...gle.com,
	oleg@...hat.com, andrea@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH -v2] mm, oom: introduce oom reaper

Michal Hocko wrote:
> Yes you are right! The reference count should be incremented before
> publishing the new mm_to_reap. I thought that an elevated ref. count by
> the caller would be enough but this was clearly wrong. Does the update
> below looks better?

I think that moving mmdrop() from oom_kill_process() to
oom_reap_vmas() xor wake_oom_reaper() makes the patch simpler.

 	rcu_read_unlock();
 
+	if (can_oom_reap)
+		wake_oom_reaper(mm); /* will call mmdrop() */
+	else
+		mmdrop(mm);
-	mmdrop(mm);
 	put_task_struct(victim);
 }
--
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/