lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Oct]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH -mm v2 1/3] mm/oom_kill: remove the wrong fatal_signal_pending() check in oom_kill_process()
On Thu 01-10-15 17:00:10, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 10/01, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > On Wed 30-09-15 20:24:05, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > [...]
> > > It is possible that the group leader
> > > has the pending SIGKILL because its sub-thread originated the coredump,
> > > in this case we must not skip this process.
> >
> > I do not understand this. If the group leader has SIGKILL pending it
> > will die anyway regardless whether we send another sigkill or not, no?
>
> Yes it will die, but only after the coredump is finished.
>
> Suppose we have a thread group with the group leader P and another
> thread T. If T starts the coredump, it sends SIGKILL to P and waits
> until it parks in exit_mm(). Then T actually dumps the core which may
> need more memory, a lot of time, etc.
>
> We need to kill this process. Yes, P is already killed and it sleeps
> in TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE so this thread does not need SIGKILL. But
> do_send_sig_info(P) will also find T and kill it too to make
> dump_interrupted() == T.

I am still utterly confused :( Where do we kill T if it is not in the
same thread group with P?
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-10-01 17:41    [W:0.077 / U:0.560 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site