[PATCH 6/9] oom: unify CAP_SYS_RAWIO check into other superuser check

[KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>]

Now, CAP_SYS_RAWIO check is very strange. if the user have both
CAP_SYS_ADMIN and CAP_SYS_RAWIO, points will makes 1/16.

Superuser's 1/4 bonus worthness is quite a bit dubious, but
considerable. However 1/16 is obviously insane.

Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
---
 mm/oom_kill.c |   17 ++++++-----------
 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index b27db90..7f91151 100644
--- a/mm/oom_kill.c
+++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
@@ -199,19 +199,14 @@ unsigned long badness(struct task_struct *p, unsigned long uptime)
 
 	/*
 	 * Superuser processes are usually more important, so we make it
-	 * less likely that we kill those.
+	 * less likely that we kill those. And we don't want to kill a
+	 * process with direct hardware access. Not only could that mess
+	 * up the hardware, but usually users tend to only have this
+	 * flag set on applications they think of as important.
 	 */
 	if (has_capability_noaudit(p, CAP_SYS_ADMIN) ||
-	    has_capability_noaudit(p, CAP_SYS_RESOURCE))
-		points /= 4;
-
-	/*
-	 * We don't want to kill a process with direct hardware access.
-	 * Not only could that mess up the hardware, but usually users
-	 * tend to only have this flag set on applications they think
-	 * of as important.
-	 */
-	if (has_capability_noaudit(p, CAP_SYS_RAWIO))
+	    has_capability_noaudit(p, CAP_SYS_RESOURCE) ||
+	    has_capability_noaudit(p, CAP_SYS_RAWIO))
 		points /= 4;
 
 	/*
-- 
1.6.5.2



--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>