Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 14:47:20 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 14:47:10 -0500 Received: from brutus.conectiva.com.br ([200.250.58.146]:29941 "EHLO brutus.conectiva.com.br") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 14:47:04 -0500 Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 17:15:52 -0200 (BRDT) From: Rik van Riel To: Andrea Arcangeli cc: schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, Linus Torvalds , mingo@chiara.elte.hu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Memory management bug In-Reply-To: <20001117191125.B27834@athlon.random> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 17 Nov 2000, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > Plus I add that the "if (!order) goto try_again" is an obvious > deadlock prone bug introduce in test9 that should be removed. 1) how would this cause deadlocks? 2) how would this somehow be worse than the unconditional 'goto try_again' we had before? This goto is ok because we have the OOM killer, which will select a process to kill when we run out of memory. Also, the goto will make sure that OTHER processes will survive while the "guilty" process will be killed. The guilty process will never get to the goto because it will have PF_MEMALLOC set. regards, Rik -- "What you're running that piece of shit Gnome?!?!" -- Miguel de Icaza, UKUUG 2000 http://www.conectiva.com/ http://www.surriel.com/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/