Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 09 Oct 2000 21:30:05 -0700 | From | David Ford <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] VM fix for 2.4.0-test9 & OOM handler |
| |
Andreas Dilger wrote:
> Albert D. Cahalan wrote: > > X, and any other big friendly processes, could participate in > > memory balancing operations. X could be made to clean out a > > Gerrit Huizenga wrote: > > Anyway, there is/was an API in PTX to say (either from in-kernel or through > > some user machinations) "I Am a System Process". Turns on a bit in the > > On AIX there is a signal called SIGDANGER, which is basically what you > are looking for. By default it is ignored, but for processes that care > (e.g. init, X, whatever) they can register a SIGDANGER handler. At an > "urgent" (as oposed to "critical") OOM situation, all processes get a > SIGDANGER sent to them. Most will ignore it, but ones with handlers > can free caches, try to do a clean shutdown, whatever. Any process with > a SIGDANGER handler get a reduction of "badness" (as the OOM killer calls > it) when looking for processes to kill. > > Having a SIGDANGER handler is good for 2 reasons: > 1) Lets processes know when memory is short so they can free needless cache. > 2) Mark process with a SIGDANGER handler as "more important" than those > without. Most people won't care about this, but init, and X, and > long-running simulations might.
Is there any reason why we can't do something like this for 2.5?
-d
-- "There is a natural aristocracy among men. The grounds of this are virtue and talents", Thomas Jefferson [1742-1826], 3rd US President
- 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/
|  |