From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
To: "Figo.zhang" <zhangtianfei@leadcoretech.com>
Cc: figo zhang <figo1802@gmail.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: Re:[PATCH v2]oom-kill: CAP_SYS_RESOURCE should get bonus
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 19:54:53 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1011031952110.28251@chino.kir.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1288836733.2124.18.camel@myhost>
On Thu, 4 Nov 2010, Figo.zhang wrote:
> In your new heuristic, you also get CAP_SYS_RESOURCE to protection.
> see fs/proc/base.c, line 1167:
> if (oom_score_adj < task->signal->oom_score_adj &&
> !capable(CAP_SYS_RESOURCE)) {
> err = -EACCES;
> goto err_sighand;
> }
That's unchanged from the old behavior with oom_adj.
> so i want to protect some process like normal process not
> CAP_SYS_RESOUCE, i set a small oom_score_adj , if new oom_score_adj is
> small than now and it is not limited resource, it will not adjust, that
> seems not right?
>
Tasks without CAP_SYS_RESOURCE cannot lower their own oom_score_adj,
otherwise it can trivially kill other tasks. They can, however, increase
their own oom_score_adj so the oom killer prefers to kill it first.
I think you may be confused: CAP_SYS_RESOURCE override resource limits.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-04 2:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-02 1:43 [PATCH]oom-kill: direct hardware access processes should get bonus Figo.zhang
2010-11-02 3:10 ` David Rientjes
2010-11-02 14:24 ` Figo.zhang
2010-11-02 19:34 ` David Rientjes
2010-11-03 23:43 ` [PATCH v2]oom-kill: CAP_SYS_RESOURCE " Figo.zhang
2010-11-03 23:47 ` David Rientjes
[not found] ` <AANLkTimjfmLzr_9+Sf4gk0xGkFjffQ1VcCnwmCXA88R8@mail.gmail.com>
2010-11-04 1:38 ` Figo.zhang
2010-11-04 1:50 ` David Rientjes
2010-11-04 2:12 ` Figo.zhang
2010-11-04 2:54 ` David Rientjes [this message]
2010-11-04 4:42 ` Figo.zhang
2010-11-04 5:08 ` David Rientjes
2010-11-09 11:01 ` [PATCH " KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-11-09 12:24 ` Alan Cox
2010-11-09 21:06 ` David Rientjes
2010-11-09 21:25 ` David Rientjes
2010-11-10 14:38 ` Figo.zhang
2010-11-10 20:50 ` David Rientjes
2010-11-09 10:41 ` [PATCH]oom-kill: direct hardware access processes " KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-11-09 12:24 ` [PATCH v2]mm/oom-kill: " Figo.zhang
2010-11-09 21:16 ` David Rientjes
2010-11-10 14:48 ` Figo.zhang
2010-11-14 5:07 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-11-14 21:29 ` David Rientjes
2010-11-15 1:24 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-11-15 10:03 ` David Rientjes
2010-11-23 7:16 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-11-28 1:36 ` David Rientjes
2010-11-30 13:00 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-11-30 20:05 ` David Rientjes
2010-11-10 15:14 ` [PATCH v3]mm/oom-kill: " Figo.zhang
2010-11-10 15:24 ` Figo.zhang
2010-11-10 21:00 ` David Rientjes
2010-11-14 5:21 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-11-14 21:33 ` David Rientjes
2010-11-15 3:26 ` [PATCH] Revert oom rewrite series Figo.zhang
2010-11-15 10:14 ` David Rientjes
2010-11-15 10:57 ` Alan Cox
2010-11-15 20:54 ` David Rientjes
2010-11-23 7:16 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-01-04 7:51 ` [PATCH v3]mm/oom-kill: direct hardware access processes should get bonus Figo.zhang
2011-01-04 8:28 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-01-04 8:56 ` Figo.zhang
2011-01-06 0:55 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2011-01-05 3:32 ` David Rientjes
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.DEB.2.00.1011031952110.28251@chino.kir.corp.google.com \
--to=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=figo1802@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=zhangtianfei@leadcoretech.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).