[lkml]   [2000]   [Sep]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: the new VM
On Mon, Sep 25, 2000 at 04:43:44PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> i talked about GFP_KERNEL, not GFP_USER. Even in the case of GFP_USER i

My bad, you're right I was talking about GFP_USER indeed.

But even GFP_KERNEL allocations like the init of a module or any other thing
that is static sized during production just checking the retval looks be ok.

> believe the right place to oom is via a signal, not in the gfp() case.

Signal can be trapped and ignored by malicious task. We had that security
problem until 2.2.14 IIRC.

> (because oom situation in the gfp() case is a completely random and
> statistical event, which might have no connection at all to the behavior
> of that given process.)

I agree we should have more information about the behaviour of the system
and I think a per-task page fault rate should work in practice.

But my question isn't what you do when you're OOM, but is _how_ do you
notice that you're OOM?

In the GFP_USER case simply checking when GFP fails looks right to me.

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 12:38    [W:0.226 / U:1.048 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site