Re: A couple of OOM killer races

[Coywolf Qi Hunt <coywolf@gmail.com>]

On 9/2/05, Richard Hayden <rahaydenuk@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> It appears there is no protection in badness() (called by
> out_of_memory() for each process) when it reads p->mm->total_vm. Another
> processor (or a kernel preemption) could presumably run do_exit and then
> exit_mm, freeing the process in question's reference to its mm just
> after the (!p->mm) check but before it reads p->mm->total_vm, making the
> latter reference a null pointer reference.

We have read_lock(&tasklist_lock); .

> 
> Also there appears to be no protection when we set p->time_slice in
> __oom_kill_task(). Am I right in thinking that this field should be
> protected by the appropriate runqueue lock, at least this is what
> scheduler_tick() seems to use?

ditto

-- 
Coywolf Qi Hunt
http://sosdg.org/~coywolf/
-
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/