[lkml]   [1998]   [Oct]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Out Of Memory in v. 2.1

On Tue, 6 Oct 1998, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:

> > more, then malloc() et al could actually return a null pointer.
> What happens when your user program has done this, used up all memory,
> and a system daemon asks for more memory? Say, named or (shock) even
> init? The system daemon dies --- that's OK, is it? And do we let the
> user space memory hog prevent networking allocations?
> It's a lot more complex than this, really.
> If you let user processes allocate all memory then _something_ has got
> to die. There's no way round that. You are not suggesting any
> solution to that fundamental problem.

if it's a program in user spae allocating that memory it is teh admin's
job to correct teh situation IMHO. That is what they they are there for.
If there's anyone running an open linux system that does not have top in
a VC or screen sorting by mem usage there is a problem.

If there is a framework/application that does not properly manage an event
such as oom on it's own then it needs to be addressed and fixed.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:44    [W:0.098 / U:3.296 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site