From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
Cc: "Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lclaudio@uudg.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH 0/1] signals: introduce send_sigkill() helper
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 02:59:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100610005937.GA4727@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100608184144.GA5914@redhat.com>
On 06/08, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > @@ -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);
>
> This is not right, we need send_sig(SIGKILL, p, 0). Better yet,
> send_sig_info(SIGKILL, SEND_SIG_NOINFO). I think send_sig() should
> die.
>
> The reason is that si_fromuser() must be true, otherwise we can't kill
> the SIGNAL_UNKILLABLE (sub-namespace inits) tasks.
>
> Oh. This reminds me, we really need the trivial (but annoying) cleanups
> here. The usage of SEND_SIG_ constants is messy, and they should be
> renamed at least.
>
> And in fact, we need the new one which acts like SEND_SIG_FORCED but
> si_fromuser(). We do not want to allocate the memory when the caller
> is oom_kill or zap_pid_ns_processes().
I tried to make some simple cleanups right now, but this really needs
time and discussion.
So. If we are going to remove force_sig() in mm/oom_kill.c (and I think
we should), I'd like to add the trivial helper first.
Oleg.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
Cc: "Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lclaudio@uudg.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH 0/1] signals: introduce send_sigkill() helper
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 02:59:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100610005937.GA4727@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100608184144.GA5914@redhat.com>
On 06/08, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > @@ -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);
>
> This is not right, we need send_sig(SIGKILL, p, 0). Better yet,
> send_sig_info(SIGKILL, SEND_SIG_NOINFO). I think send_sig() should
> die.
>
> The reason is that si_fromuser() must be true, otherwise we can't kill
> the SIGNAL_UNKILLABLE (sub-namespace inits) tasks.
>
> Oh. This reminds me, we really need the trivial (but annoying) cleanups
> here. The usage of SEND_SIG_ constants is messy, and they should be
> renamed at least.
>
> And in fact, we need the new one which acts like SEND_SIG_FORCED but
> si_fromuser(). We do not want to allocate the memory when the caller
> is oom_kill or zap_pid_ns_processes().
I tried to make some simple cleanups right now, but this really needs
time and discussion.
So. If we are going to remove force_sig() in mm/oom_kill.c (and I think
we should), I'd like to add the trivial helper first.
Oleg.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-06-10 1:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-06-08 11:53 [0/10] 3rd pile of OOM patch series KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:53 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:54 ` [PATCH 01/10] oom: don't try to kill oom_unkillable child KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:54 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 19:10 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 19:10 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 11:55 ` [PATCH 02/10] oom: remove verbose argument from __oom_kill_process() KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:55 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 19:09 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 19:09 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 11:56 ` [PATCH 03/10] oom: rename badness() to oom_badness() KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:56 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 19:09 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 19:09 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 11:57 ` [PATCH 04/10] oom: move sysctl declarations to oom.h KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:57 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:58 ` [PATCH 05/10] oom: enable oom tasklist dump by default KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:58 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:59 ` [PATCH 06/10] oom: cleanup has_intersects_mems_allowed() KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:59 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 19:07 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 19:07 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 11:59 ` [PATCH 07/10] oom: kill useless debug print KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:59 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 19:01 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 19:01 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 12:01 ` [PATCH 08/10] oom: use send_sig() instead force_sig() KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 12:01 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 18:41 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-08 18:41 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-10 0:59 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2010-06-10 0:59 ` [PATCH 0/1] signals: introduce send_sigkill() helper Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-10 1:00 ` [PATCH 1/1] " Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-10 1:00 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-11 0:40 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-06-11 0:40 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-06-13 11:24 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-13 11:24 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-13 15:29 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-13 15:29 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-16 10:00 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-16 10:00 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-13 11:24 ` [PATCH 08/10] oom: use send_sig() instead force_sig() KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-13 11:24 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 12:02 ` [PATCH 09/10] oom: filter tasks not sharing the same cpuset KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 12:02 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 19:05 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 19:05 ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 12:04 ` [PATCH 10/10] oom: select task from tasklist for mempolicy ooms KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 12:04 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100610005937.GA4727@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=lclaudio@uudg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.