lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [May]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch 1/5] oom: cleanup android low memory killer
On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 04:12:57PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Mon, 4 May 2009, Greg KH wrote:
>
> > > This patch in the series is really more of a convenience than anything
> > > else since it doesn't change anything functionally. I had to modify the
> > > lowmemorykiller later because there's a potential for a NULL pointer from
> > > dereferencing p->mm without holding task_lock(p) and also because I moved
> > > oomkilladj from struct task_struct to struct mm_struct.
> >
> > Is this still the case on top of Arve's changes?
> >
>
> Yeah, the first of two patches Arve just sent is broken:

Ok, care to work with Arve to come up with a series that both of you
agree will work properly?

> > Right now, people are still arguing that the android low memory driver
> > is not needed, but something is, yet no one has proposed a viable
> > solution for all parties :(
> >
>
> There was an interest in a low mem userspace notifier that applications
> can poll() on at configurable low mem levels to react accordingly. This
> would probably address the problem that the Android team is trying to fix.

Yes, I think it would.

> Regardless, my patchset includes two fixes for current bugs in the oom
> killer: a possible NULL pointer when /proc/sys/vm/oom_dump_tasks is
> enabled and a possible livelock when killing a task that shares memory
> with an OOM_DISABLE task. I'm not really interested in seeing who can get
> their patches into the staging tree first, I'm more concerned about fixing
> the oom killer.

Agreed, working with Arve on this would be most appreciated.

thanks,

greg k-h


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-05-05 01:23    [W:2.586 / U:0.000 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site