From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757295AbZEDXTs (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 May 2009 19:19:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754068AbZEDXTj (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 May 2009 19:19:39 -0400 Received: from kroah.org ([198.145.64.141]:51790 "EHLO coco.kroah.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753953AbZEDXTi (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 May 2009 19:19:38 -0400 Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 16:16:26 -0700 From: Greg KH To: David Rientjes Cc: Arve =?iso-8859-1?B?SGr4bm5lduVn?= , Andrew Morton , Nick Piggin , San Mehat , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Greg KH Subject: Re: [patch 1/5] oom: cleanup android low memory killer Message-ID: <20090504231626.GA27123@kroah.com> References: <20090504220905.GA29402@kroah.com> <20090504225936.GA9876@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 04:12:57PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote: > On Mon, 4 May 2009, Greg KH wrote: > > > > This patch in the series is really more of a convenience than anything > > > else since it doesn't change anything functionally. I had to modify the > > > lowmemorykiller later because there's a potential for a NULL pointer from > > > dereferencing p->mm without holding task_lock(p) and also because I moved > > > oomkilladj from struct task_struct to struct mm_struct. > > > > Is this still the case on top of Arve's changes? > > > > Yeah, the first of two patches Arve just sent is broken: Ok, care to work with Arve to come up with a series that both of you agree will work properly? > > Right now, people are still arguing that the android low memory driver > > is not needed, but something is, yet no one has proposed a viable > > solution for all parties :( > > > > There was an interest in a low mem userspace notifier that applications > can poll() on at configurable low mem levels to react accordingly. This > would probably address the problem that the Android team is trying to fix. Yes, I think it would. > Regardless, my patchset includes two fixes for current bugs in the oom > killer: a possible NULL pointer when /proc/sys/vm/oom_dump_tasks is > enabled and a possible livelock when killing a task that shares memory > with an OOM_DISABLE task. I'm not really interested in seeing who can get > their patches into the staging tree first, I'm more concerned about fixing > the oom killer. Agreed, working with Arve on this would be most appreciated. thanks, greg k-h