[PATCH 08/10] oom: use send_sig() instead force_sig()

From: KOSAKI Motohiro
Date: Tue Jun 08 2010 - 08:01:52 EST

Oleg, I parsed your mention mean following patch, correct?

Oleg pointed out oom_kill.c has force_sig() abuse. force_sig() mean
ignore signal mask. but SIGKILL itself is not maskable.
So, we can use send_sig() sefely.

Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
mm/oom_kill.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/oom_kill.c b/mm/oom_kill.c
index e7d3a5d..599f977 100644
--- a/mm/oom_kill.c
+++ b/mm/oom_kill.c
@@ -399,7 +399,7 @@ static int __oom_kill_process(struct task_struct *p, struct mem_cgroup *mem)
p->rt.time_slice = HZ;
set_tsk_thread_flag(p, TIF_MEMDIE);

- force_sig(SIGKILL, p);
+ send_sig(SIGKILL, p, 1);

return 0;

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/