So I've ended up with a replacement for this patch which does the
following:
---
>From c40900923c78b51215794cc445d3f5a589b8f785 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Michal Hocko
Date: Mon, 30 May 2016 13:53:28 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] mm, oom: skip vforked tasks from being selected
vforked tasks are not
On Mon 30-05-16 13:40:17, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 11:52:12AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Mon 30-05-16 09:13:57, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Fri 27-05-16 19:48:30, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> > > > On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 02:40:13PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > [..
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 11:52:12AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 30-05-16 09:13:57, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Fri 27-05-16 19:48:30, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 02:40:13PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > @@ -839,6 +841,13 @@ void oom_kill_process(struct
On Mon 30-05-16 09:13:57, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 27-05-16 19:48:30, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> > On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 02:40:13PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
> > > @@ -839,6 +841,13 @@ void oom_kill_process(struct oom_control *oc, struct
> > > task_struct *p,
> > > for_each_process
On Fri 27-05-16 19:48:30, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 02:40:13PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > @@ -839,6 +841,13 @@ void oom_kill_process(struct oom_control *oc, struct
> > task_struct *p,
> > for_each_process(p) {
> > if (!process_shares_mm(p, mm))
> >
On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 02:40:13PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> From: Michal Hocko
>
> vforked tasks are not really sitting on memory so it doesn't matter much
> to kill them. Parents are waiting for vforked task killable so it is
> better to chose parent which is the real mm owner. Teach oom_bad
6 matches
Mail list logo
