From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753417AbZHFFQw (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Aug 2009 01:16:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752060AbZHFFQw (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Aug 2009 01:16:52 -0400 Received: from mail-gx0-f213.google.com ([209.85.217.213]:37642 "EHLO mail-gx0-f213.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752045AbZHFFQv convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Aug 2009 01:16:51 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=OdvVT3AAdJdD8+SJPpEZTAxlZ5KGjfpGDukDEzgvOdJgtnSBKRmNit+7qXFiwITH1+ /KGpu5QTXg+wwMzQNI4NV67x/2vYAGXOdeFBX1m/VKxJ+zWHDcoNdl5BiXIfz2V0I4Us 5CaT8cTYAStKNIOpZKd6vHMZ2wNlfGWtTqFqk= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20090806013444.GA22095@redhat.com> References: <20090804191031.6A3D.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090804192514.6A40.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <20090806013444.GA22095@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 14:16:51 +0900 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 1474db64bd2d1df5 Message-ID: <2f11576a0908052216i560b977by68c400020e786d47@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] oom: move oom_adj to signal_struct From: KOSAKI Motohiro To: Oleg Nesterov Cc: LKML , Paul Menage , David Rientjes , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Rik van Riel , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , linux-mm Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 2009/8/6 Oleg Nesterov : > Sorry for late reply. And sorry, I didn't read these patches carefully yet, > probably missed something... > > On 08/04, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: >> >> --- a/mm/oom_kill.c >> +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c >> @@ -34,6 +34,31 @@ int sysctl_oom_dump_tasks; >>  static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(zone_scan_lock); >>  /* #define DEBUG */ >> >> +int get_oom_adj(struct task_struct *tsk) > > is it used outside oom_kill.c ? Good catch. Will fix. >> +{ >> +     unsigned long flags; >> +     int oom_adj = OOM_DISABLE; >> + >> +     if (tsk->mm && lock_task_sighand(tsk, &flags)) { > > Minor nit. _Afaics_, unlike proc, oom_kill.c never needs lock_task_sighand() > to access ->signal->oom_adj. > > If the task was found under tasklist_lock by for_each_process/do_each_thread > it must have the valid ->signal != NULL and it can't go away. Thanks good suggestion! Will fix. > With these patches I think mm-introduce-proc-pid-oom_adj_child.patch should > be dropped. This is good ;) I agree, It should be dropped.