lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Mar]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/5] Revert "oom: give the dying task a higher priority"
Date
Hi

> @@ -434,9 +452,17 @@ static int oom_kill_task(struct task_struct *p)
> K(get_mm_counter(p->mm, MM_FILEPAGES)));
> task_unlock(p);
>
> - p->rt.time_slice = HZ; <<---- THIS
> +
> set_tsk_thread_flag(p, TIF_MEMDIE);
> force_sig(SIGKILL, p);
> +
> + /*
> + * We give our sacrificial lamb high priority and access to
> + * all the memory it needs. That way it should be able to
> + * exit() and clear out its resources quickly...
> + */
> + boost_dying_task_prio(p, mem);
> +
> return 0;
> }
>
> At that time, I thought that routine is meaningless in non-RT scheduler.
> So I Cced Peter but don't get the answer.
> I just want to confirm it.
>
> Do you still think it's meaningless?

In short, yes.


> so you remove it when you revert 93b43fa5508?
> Then, this isn't just revert patch but revert + killing meaningless code patch.

If you want, I'd like to rename a patch title. That said, we can't revert
93b43fa5508 simple cleanly, several patches depend on it. therefore I
reverted it manualy. and at that time, I don't want to resurrect
meaningless logic. anyway it's no matter. Luis is preparing new patches.
therefore we will get the same end result. :)





\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-03-28 11:51    [W:0.166 / U:20.740 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site