linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] mm, oom_adj: don't loop through tasks in __set_oom

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200825191225.GK22869@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date:   Tue, 25 Aug 2020 21:12:25 +0200
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
To:     Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
Cc:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
        mingo@...nel.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, esyr@...hat.com,
        christian@...lner.me, areber@...hat.com,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>, cyphar@...har.com,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, adobriyan@...il.com,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        gladkov.alexey@...il.com, Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
        daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com, avagin@...il.com,
        bernd.edlinger@...mail.de,
        John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>,
        laoar.shao@...il.com, Tim Murray <timmurray@...gle.com>,
        Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
        kernel-team <kernel-team@...roid.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] mm, oom_adj: don't loop through tasks in
 __set_oom_adj when not necessary

On Tue 25-08-20 10:36:45, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 9:38 AM Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com> wrote:
[...]
> > > diff --git a/include/linux/oom.h b/include/linux/oom.h
> > > index f022f581ac29..861f22bd4706 100644
> > > --- a/include/linux/oom.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/oom.h
> > > @@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ struct oom_control {
> > >  };
> > >
> > >  extern struct mutex oom_lock;
> > > +extern struct mutex oom_adj_lock;
> >                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >
> > I understand moving this lock by why renaming it?
> 
> To be consistent with the mutex name right above it. I'm ok keeping it
> as before if this is too much additional churn. I guess Michal deals
> with this code more than anyone else, so I'll wait for him to comment
> on this one.

I cannot say I would care deeply about naming. Consistency looks nice
but if there is a preference to keep the lock then I will not object.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs