On Fri, 23 Apr 2010, npig...@suse.de wrote:
> As explained in commit 1c0fe6e3bd, we want to call the architecture
> independent
> oom killer when getting an unexplained OOM from handle_mm_fault, rather than
> simply killing current.
>
> Cc: linuxppc-...@ozlabs.org
> Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <b...@kernel.crashing.org>
> Cc: linux-a...@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npig...@suse.de>
> ---
> Index: linux-2.6/arch/powerpc/mm/fault.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/arch/powerpc/mm/fault.c
> +++ linux-2.6/arch/powerpc/mm/fault.c
> @@ -359,15 +359,10 @@ bad_area_nosemaphore:
> */
> out_of_memory:
> up_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
> - if (is_global_init(current)) {
> - yield();
> - down_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
> - goto survive;
> - }
> - printk("VM: killing process %s\n", current->comm);
> - if (user_mode(regs))
> - do_group_exit(SIGKILL);
> - return SIGKILL;
> + if (!user_mode(regs))
> + return SIGKILL;
> + pagefault_out_of_memory();
> + return 0;
Do we really want to return 0 and indicate that the fault was handled? It
seems more consistent to do
if (user_mode(regs))
pagefault_out_of_memory();
return SIGKILL;
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
