linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm,oom: Bring OOM notifier callbacks to outside of OOM killer.

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 27 Jun 2018 07:31:25 -0700
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc:     Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm,oom: Bring OOM notifier callbacks to outside of OOM
 killer.

On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 09:22:07AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 26-06-18 10:03:45, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> [...]
> > 3.	Something else?
> 
> How hard it would be to use a different API than oom notifiers? E.g. a
> shrinker which just kicks all the pending callbacks if the reclaim
> priority reaches low values (e.g. 0)?

Beats me.  What is a shrinker?  ;-)

More seriously, could you please point me at an exemplary shrinker
use case so I can see what is involved?

							Thanx, Paul