Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:06:49 +0200 | From | Helge Hafting <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] VM fix for 2.4.0-test9 & OOM handler |
| |
Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 09, 2000 at 08:42:26PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > ignoring the kill would just preserve those bugs artificially. > > If the oom killer kills a thing like init by mistake or init has a memleak > you'll notice both problems regardless of having a magic for init in a _very_ > slow path so I don't buy your point. > . > For corretness init must not be killed ever, period. > > So you have two choices: > > o math proof that the current algorithm without the magic can't end > killing init (and I should be able to proof the other way around > instead) > > o have a magic check for init > > So the magic is _strictly_ necessary at the moment.
A well-written init will be saved by being the oldest process around. A memory-leaking init _will_ be killed even whith your magic test, when the kernel eventually gets stuck OOM and init is the only process left (all the other have been OOM-killed before.) A deadlocked kernel don't schedule any processes, so they are all dead.
If you want init to live - prove that it don't eat too much memory.
Helge Hafting - 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/
|  |