On Wed, 4 Dec 2013, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> find_lock_task_mm() expects it is called under rcu or tasklist lock,
> but it seems that at least oom_unkillable_task()->task_in_mem_cgroup()
> and mem_cgroup_out_of_memory()->oom_badness() can call it lockless.
>
> Perhaps we could fix the callers, but
On Wed 04-12-13 14:04:20, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> find_lock_task_mm() expects it is called under rcu or tasklist lock,
> but it seems that at least oom_unkillable_task()->task_in_mem_cgroup()
> and mem_cgroup_out_of_memory()->oom_badness() can call it lockless.
>
> Perhaps we could fix the
find_lock_task_mm() expects it is called under rcu or tasklist lock,
but it seems that at least oom_unkillable_task()->task_in_mem_cgroup()
and mem_cgroup_out_of_memory()->oom_badness() can call it lockless.
Perhaps we could fix the callers, but this patch simply adds rcu lock
into
find_lock_task_mm() expects it is called under rcu or tasklist lock,
but it seems that at least oom_unkillable_task()-task_in_mem_cgroup()
and mem_cgroup_out_of_memory()-oom_badness() can call it lockless.
Perhaps we could fix the callers, but this patch simply adds rcu lock
into
On Wed 04-12-13 14:04:20, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
find_lock_task_mm() expects it is called under rcu or tasklist lock,
but it seems that at least oom_unkillable_task()-task_in_mem_cgroup()
and mem_cgroup_out_of_memory()-oom_badness() can call it lockless.
Perhaps we could fix the callers, but
On Wed, 4 Dec 2013, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
find_lock_task_mm() expects it is called under rcu or tasklist lock,
but it seems that at least oom_unkillable_task()-task_in_mem_cgroup()
and mem_cgroup_out_of_memory()-oom_badness() can call it lockless.
Perhaps we could fix the callers, but this
6 matches
Mail list logo