On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
quoted text > David, I just can't understand why
> oom-badness-heuristic-rewrite.patch
> duplicates the related code in fs/proc/base.c and why it preserves
> the deprecated signal->oom_adj.
>
You could combine the two write functions together and then two read
functions together if you'd like.
quoted text > OK. Please forget about lock_task_sighand/signal issues. Can't we kill
> signal->oom_adj and create a single helper for both
> /proc/pid/{oom_adj,oom_score_adj} ?
>
> static ssize_t oom_any_adj_write(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
> size_t count, bool deprecated_mode)
> {
> struct task_struct *task;
> char buffer[PROC_NUMBUF];
> unsigned long flags;
> long oom_score_adj;
> int err;
>
> memset(buffer, 0, sizeof(buffer));
> if (count > sizeof(buffer) - 1)
> count = sizeof(buffer) - 1;
> if (copy_from_user(buffer, buf, count))
> return -EFAULT;
>
> err = strict_strtol(strstrip(buffer), 0, &oom_score_adj);
> if (err)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> if (depraceted_mode) {
> if (oom_score_adj == OOM_ADJUST_MAX)
> oom_score_adj = OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MAX;
???
quoted text > else
> oom_score_adj = (oom_score_adj * OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MAX) /
> -OOM_DISABLE;
> }
>
> if (oom_score_adj < OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN ||
> oom_score_adj > OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MAX)
That doesn't work for depraceted_mode (sic), you'd need to test for
OOM_ADJUST_MIN and OOM_ADJUST_MAX in that case.
quoted text > return -EINVAL;
>
> task = get_proc_task(file->f_path.dentry->d_inode);
> if (!task)
> return -ESRCH;
> if (!lock_task_sighand(task, &flags)) {
> put_task_struct(task);
> return -ESRCH;
> }
> if (oom_score_adj < task->signal->oom_score_adj &&
> !capable(CAP_SYS_RESOURCE)) {
> unlock_task_sighand(task, &flags);
> put_task_struct(task);
> return -EACCES;
> }
>
> task->signal->oom_score_adj = oom_score_adj;
>
> unlock_task_sighand(task, &flags);
> put_task_struct(task);
> return count;
> }
>
There have been efforts to reuse as much of this code as possible for
other sysctl handlers as well, you might be better off looking for other
users of the common read and write code and then merging them first
(comm_write, proc_coredump_filter_write, etc).
--
unsubscribe notice To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at
http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at
http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Messages in current thread:
Re: [PATCH -mm] proc: don't take ->siglock for /proc/pid/o ... , David Rientjes , (Wed Mar 31, 2:14 pm)