Re: Re:[PATCH v2]oom-kill: CAP_SYS_RESOURCE should get bonus

[David Rientjes]

On Thu, 4 Nov 2010, Figo.zhang wrote:

> In your new heuristic, you also get CAP_SYS_RESOURCE to protection.
> see fs/proc/base.c, line 1167:
> 	if (oom_score_adj < task->signal->oom_score_adj &&
> 			!capable(CAP_SYS_RESOURCE)) {
> 		err = -EACCES;
> 		goto err_sighand;
> 	}

That's unchanged from the old behavior with oom_adj.

> so i want to protect some process like normal process not
> CAP_SYS_RESOUCE, i set a small oom_score_adj , if new oom_score_adj is
> small than now and it is not limited resource, it will not adjust, that
> seems not right?
> 

Tasks without CAP_SYS_RESOURCE cannot lower their own oom_score_adj, 
otherwise it can trivially kill other tasks.  They can, however, increase 
their own oom_score_adj so the oom killer prefers to kill it first.

I think you may be confused: CAP_SYS_RESOURCE override resource limits.
--
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/