Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 25 Sep 2000 17:24:12 +0200 | From | Andrea Arcangeli <> | Subject | Re: the new VM |
| |
On Mon, Sep 25, 2000 at 05:10:43PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > a SIGKILL? i agree with the 2.2 solution - first a soft signal, and if > it's being ignored then a SIGKILL.
Actually we do the soft signal try (SIGTERM) only if the task was running with iopl privilegies (and that means on alpha and other archs where there isn't the iopl we send a SIGKILL to X immediatly).
Extending it to all tasks looked a bit riskious solution because then we would even less probability to kill the right task since all tasks would run oom while the first is put to sleep for a while. With X we really prefer to kill another task than screwup the console instead (even when X is the real hog, and X can be made the real hog by any tasks that allocates huge xshm). Kray reproduces this easily.
> > But my question isn't what you do when you're OOM, but is _how_ do you > > notice that you're OOM? > > good question :-)
:))
> i think the GFP_USER case should do the oom logic within __alloc_pages(),
What's the difference of implementing the logic outside alloc_pages? Putting the logic inside looks not clean design to me.
Andrea - 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/
| |