Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | From | KOSAKI Motohiro <> | Subject | [PATCH 08/10] oom: use send_sig() instead force_sig() | Date | Tue, 8 Jun 2010 21:01:44 +0900 (JST) |
| |
Oleg, I parsed your mention mean following patch, correct?
=========================================== Oleg pointed out oom_kill.c has force_sig() abuse. force_sig() mean ignore signal mask. but SIGKILL itself is not maskable. So, we can use send_sig() sefely.
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> --- mm/oom_kill.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c index e7d3a5d..599f977 100644 --- a/mm/oom_kill.c +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c @@ -399,7 +399,7 @@ static int __oom_kill_process(struct task_struct *p, struct mem_cgroup *mem) p->rt.time_slice = HZ; set_tsk_thread_flag(p, TIF_MEMDIE); - force_sig(SIGKILL, p); + send_sig(SIGKILL, p, 1); return 0; } -- 1.6.5.2
| |