Andrew Morton wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 16:09:43 +0200 (CEST)
Nick Piggin <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]>
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 [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
