Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 22 May 2006 15:12:27 -0700 | From | Paul Jackson <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH (try #2)] mm: avoid unnecessary OOM kills |
| |
Dave wrote: > - if (printk_ratelimit()) { > - printk("oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x%x, order=%d\n", > - gfp_mask, order); > - dump_stack(); > - show_mem(); > - } > - > + printk("oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x%x, order=%d\n", gfp_mask, order); > + dump_stack(); > + show_mem();
Why disable this printk_ratelimit? Does this expose us to a Denial of Service attack from someone forcing multiple oom-kills in a small cpuset, generating much kernel printk output?
> +/* Try to allocate one more time before invoking the OOM killer. */ > +static struct page * oom_alloc(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
This comment is slightly stale. Not only does oom_alloc() try one more allocation, it also actually does invoke the OOM killer.
How about the comment:
/* Serialize oom killing, while trying to allocate a page */
Or some such ..
-- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.925.600.0401 - 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/
| |