lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Feb]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: OOM-killer too aggressive?
On Mon, 27 Feb 2006, Andrew Morton wrote:

> > On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 02:30:02PM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > > Isnt this also a constrained allocation? We could expand the check to also
> > > catch these types of restrictions and fail.
> >
> > No, it uses the full fallback zone list of the target node, not a custom
> > one. Would be hard to detect without a flag.

Right but it specifies in its flags that not all system memory can satisfy
this particular memory request. That fact may be detected by the
out_of_memory() function. We could do something special there instead of
OOMing.



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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-02-28 02:06    [W:6.226 / U:3.028 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site