Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 5 Jun 2002 09:33:00 -0400 (EDT) | From | Bill Davidsen <> | Subject | Re: Memory management in Kernel 2.4.x |
| |
On 27 May 2002, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-05-27 at 22:22, H. Peter Anvin wrote: <_snip_> > > Well, if you can't fork a new process because that would push you into > > overcommit, then you usually can't actually do anything useful on the > > machine. > > Thats actually easy to deal with and on my list for modes 4 and 5 (2 and > 3 with root granted a reserved fraction)
It seems to me that selectively limiting the number of processes in a pgroup, or selectively killing large RSS programs in a large pgroup (non-root) would be one way to identify the processes which were either clone/fork looping, or have children begetting children. After than perhaps killing or restricting from the high numerical uid down. That might tend to spare system and/or well-behaved processes.
Comment?
-- bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com> CTO, TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |