On Wed 17-02-16 23:31:00, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > oom_scan_process_thread() returns OOM_SCAN_SELECT when there is a > thread which returns oom_task_origin() == true. But it is possible > that such thread is marked as OOM-unkillable. In that case, the OOM > killer must not select such process.
As already pointed out swapoff or ksm run_store are the only users of OOM_FLAG_ORIGIN and it would be insane to run them from an oom disabled context. So I wouldn't care much about this part that much and consider the patch to be more of a cleanup rather than a bug fix. > Since it is meaningless to return OOM_SCAN_OK for OOM-unkillable > process because subsequent oom_badness() call will return 0, this > patch changes oom_scan_process_thread to return OOM_SCAN_CONTINUE > if that process is marked as OOM-unkillable (regardless of > oom_task_origin()). > > Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <[email protected]> > Suggested-by: Michal Hocko <[email protected]> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <[email protected]> > --- > mm/oom_kill.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c > index 7653055..cf87153 100644 > --- a/mm/oom_kill.c > +++ b/mm/oom_kill.c > @@ -282,7 +282,7 @@ enum oom_scan_t oom_scan_process_thread(struct > oom_control *oc, > if (!is_sysrq_oom(oc)) > return OOM_SCAN_ABORT; > } > - if (!task->mm) > + if (!task->mm || task->signal->oom_score_adj == OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN) > return OOM_SCAN_CONTINUE; > > /* > -- > 1.8.3.1 -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
