Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757989Ab1DNA5p (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Apr 2011 20:57:45 -0400 Received: from mail-vw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.212.46]:55498 "EHLO mail-vw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757693Ab1DNA5n convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Apr 2011 20:57:43 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=EoB6ek/ypXbKJtZ/9qW/22a5UR5UEdwQqSxvfG5FB5KDYIDlKd/NvvjgeUFye82OpN he6OuqOdon84hXXRuppDY2Oj8T7sMQlNTLcci7jUvRa9vn8xrN2urp4tCBpCTt9K/Yx7 aCbZ/A4F/vb78E8i8wvyTePTQzVWUjMpV2anc= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20110414093549.80539260.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20110329101234.54d5d45a.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20110414092033.0809.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <20110414093549.80539260.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:57:42 +0900 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] forkbomb killer From: Minchan Kim To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro , 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2128 Lines: 65 Hi, KOSAKI and Kame. On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 9:35 AM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > 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 > > Unfortunately, we didn't have a slot to discuss the oom and forkbomb. So, personally, I talked it with some guys(who we know very well :) ) for a moment during lunch time at LSF/MM. It seems he doesn't feel strongly we really need it and still I am not sure it, either. Now most important thing is to listen other's opinions about we really need it and we need it in kernel. And I have a idea to implement my one in automatic, too. :) Thanks for your interest. -- Kind regards, Minchan Kim -- 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/