[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160624202254.GA30695@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 22:22:55 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
"kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>, Jann Horn <jann@...jh.net>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/13] Virtually mapped stacks with guard pages
(x86, core)
On 06/24, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> On Fri 24-06-16 16:05:58, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Thu 23-06-16 20:52:21, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > >
> > > But I agree, this is fixable (and in fact I still hope TIF_MEMDIE will die,
> > > at least in its current form).
> >
> > We can move the flag to the task_struct.
Well, I actually meant that to me its usage doesn't look really
right and we need to change this logic. But this is off-topic.
> Here is the patch.
Can't comment, but note that it was decided to move ti->flags into
task_struct, so the patch is "off-topic" too ;)
> @@ -1856,6 +1856,8 @@ struct task_struct {
> unsigned long task_state_change;
> #endif
> int pagefault_disabled;
> + /* oom victim - give it access to memory reserves */
> + atomic_t memdie;
Yet another oom member. And these atomic_add_unless's look a bit
strange, it seems that you could add "bool memdie" and use xchg()
with the same effect?
Oleg.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
