Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 9 Oct 2000 20:47:51 +0200 (CEST) | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] VM fix for 2.4.0-test9 & OOM handler |
| |
On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, Rik van Riel wrote:
> In that case the time the process has been running and the > CPU time used will save the process if it's been running for > a long time.
'importance' is not something we can measure reliably within the kernel. And assuming that a niced, not long-running process is unimportant misses the bus as well. What if i just started an important simulation before going to vacation for two weeks?
> would you really care if a simulation would be killed after > 5 minutes? [...]
yes, i would. I would probably end up not using nice values. Please, Rik, dont penalize an unrelated kernel feature!
> [...] The objective is to destroy the least amount of work, which > means giving a bonus to processes which have used a lot of CPU time > already ... regardless of nice value.
your OOM code does not follow this objective:
+ /* + * Niced processes are most likely less important, so double + * their badness points. + */ + if (p->nice > 0) + points *= 2;
Niced processes *can be just as important*.
> If you have a better algorithm, feel free to send patches.
yes. Please remove the above part.
Ingo
- 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/
|  |