suckless/slock
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

Simplify the oom-taming-function

Browse source 
There really is no need to source a defined variable from a linux
header. The OOM-rank ranges from -1000 to 1000, so we can safely
hardcode -1000, which is a sane thing to do given slock is suid and
we don't want to play around too much here anyway.

On another notice, let's not forget that this still is a shitty
heuristic. The OOM-killer still can kill us (thus I also changed
the wording in the error-message. We do not disable the OOM-killer,
we're just hiding.
This commit is contained in:
FRIGN 2016-02-14 01:28:37 +01:00
parent 6a52a85a1a
commit 3abbffa493
1 changed files with 6 additions and 14 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

20
slock.c
View file

@ -60,28 +60,20 @@ die(const char *errstr, ...)
#ifdef __linux__
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <linux/oom.h>
static void
dontkillme(void)
{
int fd;
int length;
char value[64];
fd = open("/proc/self/oom_score_adj", O_WRONLY);
if (fd < 0 && errno == ENOENT)
if (fd < 0 && errno == ENOENT) {
return;
/* convert OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN to string for writing */
length = snprintf(value, sizeof(value), "%d\n", OOM_SCORE_ADJ_MIN);
/* bail on truncation */
if (length >= sizeof(value))
die("buffer too small\n");
if (fd < 0 || write(fd, value, length) != length || close(fd) != 0)
die("cannot disable the out-of-memory killer for this process (make sure to suid or sgid slock)\n");
}
if (fd < 0 || write(fd, "-1000\n", (sizeof("-1000\n") - 1)) !=
(sizeof("-1000\n") - 1) || close(fd) != 0) {
die("can't tame the oom-killer. is suid or sgid set?\n");
}
}
#endif