lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Mar]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: On the issue of low memory situations
Den 18-Mar-00 01:24:49 skrev Linda Walsh følgende om "Re: On the issue of low memory situations":

> I haven't read through this whole thread, so this may have been
> suggested, but why not have a new signal "SIGNMEM". Can't be caught but
> can be ignored. Default is to take the signal and terminate the program
> that faulted. If ignored, put process to sleep until the memory request
> can be satisfied. Then something like 'X' or apache could ignore, while
> 'gcc' would just die.

It would be much more useful to make it possible for SIGNMEM to be
caught. This would be similiar to low memory handlers as seen on AmigaOS.
Programs could then register a signal handler for SIGNMEM and free up
memory that isn't needed when the signal handler is caught. Some programs
cache reconstructable data for speed reasons and some daemons keep idle
children running to save fork()/exit() overhead.

Just wondering: Linux isn't smart enough to unload unused modules in low
memory situations, is it?

Regards,

/¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯T¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯\
| Rask Ingemann Lambertsen | E-mail: mailto:rask@kampsax.dtu.dk |
| Please do NOT Cc: to me or the | WWW: http://www.gbar.dtu.dk/~c948374/ |
| mailing list. I am on the list.| "ThrustMe" on XPilot, ARCnet and IRC |
| Windows NT is the OS of the future and always will be... |


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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:57    [W:0.689 / U:0.024 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site