Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932343Ab1DNAmY (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Apr 2011 20:42:24 -0400 Received: from fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.35]:49110 "EHLO fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932139Ab1DNAmX (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Apr 2011 20:42:23 -0400 X-SecurityPolicyCheck-FJ: OK by FujitsuOutboundMailChecker v1.3.1 Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:35:49 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki To: KOSAKI Motohiro Cc: Minchan Kim , Andrew Morton , Hiroyuki Kamezawa , Michel Lespinasse , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "rientjes@google.com" , Andrey Vagin , Hugh Dickins , Johannes Weiner , Rik van Riel Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] forkbomb killer Message-Id: <20110414093549.80539260.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <20110414092033.0809.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20110329101234.54d5d45a.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20110414092033.0809.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> Organization: FUJITSU Co. LTD. X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.1.0 (GTK+ 2.10.14; i686-pc-mingw32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1468 Lines: 44 On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:20:41 +0900 (JST) KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > Hi, Minchan, Kamezawa-san, > > > >> So whenever user push sysrq, older tasks would be killed and at last, > > >> root forkbomb task would be killed. > > >> > > > > > > Maybe good for a single user system and it can send Sysrq. > > > But I myself not very excited with this new feature becasuse I need to > > > run to push Sysrq .... > > > > > > Please do as you like, I think the idea itself is interesting. > > > But I love some automatic ones. I do other jobs. > > > > Okay. Thanks for the comment, Kame. > > > > I hope Andrew or someone gives feedback forkbomb problem itself before > > diving into this. > > May I ask current status of this thread? I'm unhappy if our kernel keep > to have forkbomb weakness. ;) I've stopped updating but can restart at any time. (And I found a bug ;) > Can we consider to take either or both idea? > I think yes, both idea can be used. One idea is - kill all recent threads by Sysrq. The user can use Sysrq multiple times until forkbomb stops. Another(mine) is - kill all problematic in automatic. This adds some tracking costs but can be configurable. Thanks, -Kame -- 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/