lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Oct]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Memory overcommit
On Wed, 28 Oct 2009, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:

> All kernel engineers know "than expected or not" can be never known to the kernel.
> So, oom_adj workaround is used now. (by some special users.)
> OOM Killer itself is also a workaround, too.
> "No kill" is the best thing but we know there are tend to be memory-leaker on bad
> systems and all systems in this world are not perfect.
>

Right, and historically that has been addressed by considering total_vm
and adjusting it with oom_adj so that we can identify memory leaking tasks
through user-defined criteria.

> Yes, some more trustable values other than vmsize/rss/time are appriciated.
> I wonder recent memory consumption speed can be an another key value.
>

Sounds very logical.

> Anyway, current bahavior of "killing X" is a bad thing.
> We need some fixes.
>

You can easily protect X with OOM_DISABLE, as you know. I don't think we
need any X-specific heuristics added to the kernel, it looks like the
special cases have already polluted badness() enough.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-10-28 07:21    [W:0.237 / U:0.324 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site