On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 5:04 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 04:39:05 PM Anup Chenthamarakshan wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:49:48AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> > On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 03:15:08 PM Anup Chenthamarakshan wrote:
>> > >
>> > >
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 5:04 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki r...@rjwysocki.net wrote:
On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 04:39:05 PM Anup Chenthamarakshan wrote:
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:49:48AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 03:15:08 PM Anup Chenthamarakshan wrote:
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 7:19 AM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 12/05, David Rientjes wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 5 Dec 2013, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>>
>> > > Your v2 series looks good and I suspect anybody trying them doesn't have
>> > > additional reports of the infinite loop? Should they be marked for
>> >
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 7:19 AM, Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com wrote:
On 12/05, David Rientjes wrote:
On Thu, 5 Dec 2013, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
Your v2 series looks good and I suspect anybody trying them doesn't have
additional reports of the infinite loop? Should they be marked for
;
> So this patch adds the new interface which has to coexist with the
> old one for some time, hopefully the next changes will be more or
> less straightforward and the old one will go away soon.
>
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov
Reviewed-by: Sameer Nanda
> ---
> incl
ts_mems_allowed()
>without even rcu_read_lock(), this is obviously buggy.
>
>Add the necessary rcu_read_lock(). This means that we can not
>simply return from the loop, we need "bool ret" and "break".
>
> Signed-off-by: Oleg
()
without even rcu_read_lock(), this is obviously buggy.
Add the necessary rcu_read_lock(). This means that we can not
simply return from the loop, we need bool ret and break.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com
Reviewed-by: Sameer Nanda sna...@chromium.org
---
mm/oom_kill.c | 37
or
less straightforward and the old one will go away soon.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com
Reviewed-by: Sameer Nanda sna...@chromium.org
---
include/linux/init_task.h |2 ++
include/linux/sched.h | 12
kernel/exit.c |1 +
kernel/fork.c
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Change do_signal_stop() and do_sigaction() to avoid next_thread()
> and use while_each_thread() instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov
Reviewed-by: Sameer Nanda
> ---
> kernel/signal.c |7 +++
> 1 files
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Change k_getrusage() to use while_each_thread(), no changes in
> the compiled code.
>
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov
Reviewed-by: Sameer Nanda
> ---
> kernel/sys.c |3 +--
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> do_task_stat() can use while_each_thread(), no changes in
> the compiled code.
>
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov
Reviewed-by: Sameer Nanda
> ---
> fs/proc/array.c |3 +--
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com wrote:
Change k_getrusage() to use while_each_thread(), no changes in
the compiled code.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com
Reviewed-by: Sameer Nanda sna...@chromium.org
---
kernel/sys.c |3 +--
1 files changed
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com wrote:
do_task_stat() can use while_each_thread(), no changes in
the compiled code.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com
Reviewed-by: Sameer Nanda sna...@chromium.org
---
fs/proc/array.c |3 +--
1 files changed, 1
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com wrote:
Change do_signal_stop() and do_sigaction() to avoid next_thread()
and use while_each_thread() instead.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com
Reviewed-by: Sameer Nanda sna...@chromium.org
---
kernel/signal.c
; Oh.. and by the way. I was hitting the same bug in other
> while_each_thread loops in oom_kill.c.
> Anyway, goodluck ;)
Thanks!
>
> 14 нояб. 2013 г. 2:18 пользователь "Sameer Nanda"
> написал:
>
>> The selection of the process to be killed happens in two spots:
&g
.. and by the way. I was hitting the same bug in other
while_each_thread loops in oom_kill.c.
Anyway, goodluck ;)
Thanks!
14 нояб. 2013 г. 2:18 пользователь Sameer Nanda sna...@chromium.org
написал:
The selection of the process to be killed happens in two spots:
first in select_bad_process
for the selected process
with tasklist_lock held in oom_kill_process.
Signed-off-by: Sameer Nanda
---
include/linux/sched.h | 5 +
mm/oom_kill.c | 34 +-
2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 6:33 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Nov 2013, Sameer Nanda wrote:
>
>> The selection of the process to be killed happens in two spots:
>> first in select_bad_process and then a further refinement by
>> looking for child processes in
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 6:33 PM, David Rientjes rient...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, 12 Nov 2013, Sameer Nanda wrote:
The selection of the process to be killed happens in two spots:
first in select_bad_process and then a further refinement by
looking for child processes in oom_kill_process
for the selected process
with tasklist_lock held in oom_kill_process.
Signed-off-by: Sameer Nanda sna...@chromium.org
---
include/linux/sched.h | 5 +
mm/oom_kill.c | 34 +-
2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h
for the selected process
with tasklist_lock held in oom_kill_process.
Change-Id: I62f9652a780863467a8174e18ea5e19bbcd78c31
Signed-off-by: Sameer Nanda
---
mm/oom_kill.c | 42 +-
1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 11/11, Sameer Nanda wrote:
>>
>> The selection of the process to be killed happens in two spots:
>> first in select_bad_process and then a further refinement by
>> looking for child processes in oom_kill_proc
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com wrote:
On 11/11, Sameer Nanda wrote:
The selection of the process to be killed happens in two spots:
first in select_bad_process and then a further refinement by
looking for child processes in oom_kill_process. Since
for the selected process
with tasklist_lock held in oom_kill_process.
Change-Id: I62f9652a780863467a8174e18ea5e19bbcd78c31
Signed-off-by: Sameer Nanda sna...@chromium.org
---
mm/oom_kill.c | 42 +-
1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm
for the selected process
with tasklist_lock held in oom_kill_process.
Signed-off-by: Sameer Nanda
---
mm/oom_kill.c | 24 +++-
1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index 6738c47..57638ef 100644
--- a/mm/oom_kill.c
+++ b/mm
for the selected process
with tasklist_lock held in oom_kill_process.
Signed-off-by: Sameer Nanda sna...@chromium.org
---
mm/oom_kill.c | 24 +++-
1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index 6738c47..57638ef 100644
--- a/mm
for the selected process
with tasklist_lock held in oom_kill_process.
Signed-off-by: Sameer Nanda
---
mm/oom_kill.c | 21 ++---
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index 6738c47..7b28d9f 100644
--- a/mm/oom_kill.c
+++ b/mm
for the selected process
with tasklist_lock held in oom_kill_process.
Change-Id: I865c64486ccfc0e4818e7045a8fa3353e2fb63f8
Signed-off-by: Sameer Nanda
---
mm/oom_kill.c | 6 --
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index 6738c47..af99b1a 100644
for the selected process
with tasklist_lock held in oom_kill_process.
Change-Id: I865c64486ccfc0e4818e7045a8fa3353e2fb63f8
Signed-off-by: Sameer Nanda sna...@chromium.org
---
mm/oom_kill.c | 6 --
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index
for the selected process
with tasklist_lock held in oom_kill_process.
Signed-off-by: Sameer Nanda sna...@chromium.org
---
mm/oom_kill.c | 21 ++---
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index 6738c47..7b28d9f 100644
--- a/mm
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 4:35 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Nov 2013, Sameer Nanda wrote:
>
>> David -- I think we can make the duration that the tasklist_lock is
>> held smaller by consolidating the process selection logic that is
>> currently split a
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 4:35 PM, David Rientjes rient...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, 6 Nov 2013, Sameer Nanda wrote:
David -- I think we can make the duration that the tasklist_lock is
held smaller by consolidating the process selection logic that is
currently split across select_bad_process
(adding back context from thread history)
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 5:18 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Nov 2013, Sameer Nanda wrote:
>
>> The selection of the process to be killed happens in two spots -- first
>> in select_bad_process and then a further refinement by lo
(adding back context from thread history)
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 5:18 PM, David Rientjes rient...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, 5 Nov 2013, Sameer Nanda wrote:
The selection of the process to be killed happens in two spots -- first
in select_bad_process and then a further refinement by looking
across the calls to both
select_bad_process and oom_kill_process.
Change-Id: I8f96b106b3257b5c103d6497bac7f04f4dff4e60
Signed-off-by: Sameer Nanda
---
mm/oom_kill.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index 6738c47..7bd3587 100644
across the calls to both
select_bad_process and oom_kill_process.
Change-Id: I8f96b106b3257b5c103d6497bac7f04f4dff4e60
Signed-off-by: Sameer Nanda sna...@chromium.org
---
mm/oom_kill.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index
36 matches
Mail list logo
