Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 13 Oct 2006 16:31:59 +1000 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: [patch 1/5] oom: don't kill unkillable children or siblings |
| |
Andrew Morton wrote:
>On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 16:09:43 +0200 (CEST) >Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> wrote: > > >>Abort the kill if any of our threads have OOM_DISABLE set. Having this test >>here also prevents any OOM_DISABLE child of the "selected" process from being >>killed. >> >>Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> >> >>Index: linux-2.6/mm/oom_kill.c >>=================================================================== >>--- linux-2.6.orig/mm/oom_kill.c >>+++ linux-2.6/mm/oom_kill.c >>@@ -312,15 +312,24 @@ static int oom_kill_task(struct task_str >> if (mm == NULL) >> return 1; >> >>+ /* >>+ * Don't kill the process if any threads are set to OOM_DISABLE >>+ */ >>+ do_each_thread(g, q) { >>+ if (q->mm == mm && p->oomkilladj == OOM_DISABLE) >>+ return 1; >>+ } while_each_thread(g, q); >>+ >> __oom_kill_task(p, message); >>+ >> /* >> * kill all processes that share the ->mm (i.e. all threads), >> * but are in a different thread group >> */ >>- do_each_thread(g, q) >>+ do_each_thread(g, q) { >> if (q->mm == mm && q->tgid != p->tgid) >> __oom_kill_task(q, message); >>- while_each_thread(g, q); >>+ } while_each_thread(g, q); >> >> return 0; >> > >One wonders whether OOM_DISABLE should be a property of the mm_struct, not >of the task_struct. >
Hmm... I don't think I could argue with that. I think this patch is needed in the meantime though.
--
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
- 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/
| |