lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Feb]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: oom killer and its superior braindamage in 2.4
On Sun, 23 Feb 2003, Marc-Christian Petersen wrote:

> > Does the below patch fix your problem ?

> With your patch, mystress.pl was marked to get killed, every PID only
> once, no apache or similar (good). ... But the strange thing is, that it
> seems none of the processes, which are marked to be killed, get killed.
> So sysrq-t tells me.

It'd be interesting to know where these processes are spending
their CPU time and why they're not catching their signals.

> Sysrq-i gave me the chance to get out of the OOM killing process and
> only kernel threads were left + getty's so I was able to log in again.

Strange, so sysrq-i manages to kill the processes, but the OOM
killer doesn't kill the processes ?

This is very suspect because the OOM killer uses force_sig in
the same way the sysrq-i handler does...

regards,

Rik
--
Engineers don't grow up, they grow sideways.
http://www.surriel.com/ http://kernelnewbies.org/
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:33    [W:0.054 / U:5.736 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site