On Fri 13-11-20 18:16:32, Andrew Morton wrote: [...] > It's all sounding a bit painful (but not *too* painful). But to > reiterate, I do think that adding the ability for a process to shoot > down a large amount of another process's memory is a lot more generally > useful than tying it to SIGKILL, agree?
I am not sure TBH. Is there any reasonable usecase where uncoordinated memory tear down is OK and a target process which is able to see the unmapped memory? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
