lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Apr]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: 2.5.68-mm2
From
Date
On Wed, 2003-04-23 at 05:59, William Lee Irwin III wrote:

> rml and I coordinated to put together a small patch (combining both
> our own) for properly locking the static variables in out_of_memory().
> There's not any evidence things are going wrong here now, but it at
> least addresses the visible lack of locking in out_of_memory().

Thank you for posting this, wli.

> - first = now;
> + /*
> + * We dropped the lock above, so check to be sure the variable
> + * first only ever increases to prevent false OOM's.
> + */
> + if (time_after(now, first))
> + first = now;

Just thinking... this little bit is actually a bug even on UP sans
kernel preemption, too, since oom_kill() can sleep. If it sleeps, and
another process enters out_of_memory(), 'now' and 'first' will be out of
sync.

So I think this patch is a Good Thing in more ways than the obvious SMP
or kernel preemption issue.

Robert Love


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:34    [W:0.149 / U:0.200 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site