[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171207095223.GB574@jagdpanzerIV>
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2017 18:52:23 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
To: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mhocko@...e.com, hannes@...xchg.org,
hillf.zj@...baba-inc.com, minchan@...nel.org,
mgorman@...hsingularity.net, ying.huang@...el.com,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
timmurray@...gle.com, tkjos@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: terminate shrink_slab loop if signal is pending
On (12/06/17 11:20), Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> Slab shrinkers can be quite time consuming and when signal
> is pending they can delay handling of the signal. If fatal
> signal is pending there is no point in shrinking that process
> since it will be killed anyway. This change checks for pending
> fatal signals inside shrink_slab loop and if one is detected
> terminates this loop early.
>
> Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
> ---
> mm/vmscan.c | 7 +++++++
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index c02c850ea349..69296528ff33 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -486,6 +486,13 @@ static unsigned long shrink_slab(gfp_t gfp_mask, int nid,
> .memcg = memcg,
> };
>
> + /*
> + * We are about to die and free our memory.
> + * Stop shrinking which might delay signal handling.
> + */
> + if (unlikely(fatal_signal_pending(current))
- if (unlikely(fatal_signal_pending(current))
+ if (unlikely(fatal_signal_pending(current)))
-ss
Powered by blists - more mailing lists