lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Oct]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] VM fix for 2.4.0-test9 & OOM handler

    On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:

    > > No. It's only needed if your OOM algorithm is so crappy that
    > > it might end up killing init by mistake.
    >
    > The algorithm you posted on the list in this thread will kill init if
    > on 4Mbyte machine without swap init is large 3 Mbytes and you execute
    > a task that grows over 1M.

    i think the OOM algorithm should not kill processes that have
    child-processes, it should first kill child-less 'leaves'. Killing a
    process that has child processes likely results in unexpected behavior of
    those child-processes. (and equals to effective killing of those
    child-processes as well.)

    But this mechanizm can be abused (a malicious memory hog can create a
    child-process just to avoid the OOM-killer) - but there are ways to avoid
    this, eg. to add all the 'MM badness' points to children? Ie. a child
    which has MM-abuser parent(s) will definitely be killed first.

    Ingo

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

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 12:39    [W:0.020 / U:61.560 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site