On Tue 09-10-18 19:00:44, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > On 2018/10/09 16:50, Michal Hocko wrote: [...] > > Well, that is unfortunate indeed and it > > breaks the OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN contract. There are basically two ways here > > 1) do not care and encourage users to use a saner way to set > > OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN because doing that externally is racy anyway e.g. > > setting it before [v]fork & exec. Btw. do we know about an actual user > > who would care? > > I'm not talking about [v]fork & exec. Why are you talking about [v]fork & > exec ?
Because that is the only raceless way to set your oom_score_adj. > > 2) add OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN and do not kill tasks sharing mm and do not > > reap the mm in the rare case of the race. > > That is no problem. The mistake we made in 4.6 was that we updated > oom_score_adj > to -1000 (and allowed unprivileged users to OOM-lockup the system). I do not follow. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
