From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail137.messagelabs.com (mail137.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.19]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7A5E3600227 for ; Wed, 30 Jun 2010 10:30:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: by pwi9 with SMTP id 9so318563pwi.14 for ; Wed, 30 Jun 2010 07:30:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 23:30:13 +0900 From: Minchan Kim Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/11] oom: remove child->mm check from oom_kill_process() Message-ID: <20100630143013.GG15644@barrios-desktop> References: <20100630172430.AA42.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <20100630183209.AA62.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100630183209.AA62.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: KOSAKI Motohiro Cc: LKML , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , David Rientjes , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Andrea Arcangeli List-ID: On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 06:32:44PM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > > Current "child->mm == p->mm" mean prevent to select vfork() task. > But we don't have any reason to don't consider vfork(). I guess "child->mm == p->mm" is for losing the minimal amount of work done as comment say. But frankly speaking, I don't understand it, either. Maybe "One shot, two kill" problem? Andrea. Could you explain it? -- Kind regards, Minchan Kim -- 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: email@kvack.org