From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1756317AbbJAPo3 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:44:29 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:53279 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1752232AbbJAPo0 (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:44:26 -0400
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 17:41:15 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>, Kyle Walker <kwalker@redhat.com>,
        Stanislav Kozina <skozina@redhat.com>,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm v2 1/3] mm/oom_kill: remove the wrong
	fatal_signal_pending() check in oom_kill_process()
Message-ID: <20151001154115.GA10342@redhat.com>
References: <20150930182341.GA15047@redhat.com> <20150930182405.GA15238@redhat.com> <20151001124941.GC24077@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20151001150010.GB6781@redhat.com> <20151001152739.GJ24077@dhcp22.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20151001152739.GJ24077@dhcp22.suse.cz>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 10/01, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> On Thu 01-10-15 17:00:10, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 10/01, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed 30-09-15 20:24:05, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > It is possible that the group leader
> > > > has the pending SIGKILL because its sub-thread originated the coredump,
> > > > in this case we must not skip this process.
> > >
> > > I do not understand this. If the group leader has SIGKILL pending it
> > > will die anyway regardless whether we send another sigkill or not, no?
> >
> > Yes it will die, but only after the coredump is finished.
> >
> > Suppose we have a thread group with the group leader P and another
> > thread T. If T starts the coredump, it sends SIGKILL to P and waits
> > until it parks in exit_mm(). Then T actually dumps the core which may
> > need more memory, a lot of time, etc.
> >
> > We need to kill this process. Yes, P is already killed and it sleeps
> > in TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE so this thread does not need SIGKILL. But
> > do_send_sig_info(P) will also find T and kill it too to make
> > dump_interrupted() == T.
>
> I am still utterly confused :( Where do we kill T if it is not in the
> same thread group with P?

But it is in the same thread group?

Oleg.