lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Sep]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
Subject[PATCH -mm 2/3] mm/oom_kill: cleanup the "kill sharing same memory"
Purely cosmetic, but the complex "if" condition looks annoying to me.
Especially because it is not consistent with OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN check
which adds another if/continue.

Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
---
mm/oom_kill.c | 22 +++++++++++++---------
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index 0d581c6..8e7bed2 100644
--- a/mm/oom_kill.c
+++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
@@ -583,16 +583,20 @@ void oom_kill_process(struct oom_control *oc, struct task_struct *p,
* pending fatal signal.
*/
rcu_read_lock();
- for_each_process(p)
- if (p->mm == mm && !same_thread_group(p, victim) &&
- !(p->flags & PF_KTHREAD)) {
- if (p->signal->oom_score_adj == OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN)
- continue;
+ for_each_process(p) {
+ if (unlikely(p->flags & PF_KTHREAD))
+ continue;
+ if (same_thread_group(p, victim))
+ continue;
+ if (p->mm != mm)
+ continue;
+ if (p->signal->oom_score_adj == OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN)
+ continue;

- pr_info("Kill process %d (%s) sharing same memory\n",
- task_pid_nr(p), p->comm);
- do_send_sig_info(SIGKILL, SEND_SIG_FORCED, p, true);
- }
+ pr_info("Kill process %d (%s) sharing same memory\n",
+ task_pid_nr(p), p->comm);
+ do_send_sig_info(SIGKILL, SEND_SIG_FORCED, p, true);
+ }
rcu_read_unlock();

mmput(mm);
--
2.4.3


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-09-29 16:41    [W:0.059 / U:0.208 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site