Messages in this thread Patch in this message |  | | From | Axel Kittenberger <> | Subject | Patch: oom_kill | Date | Tue, 4 Feb 2003 13:32:05 +0100 |
| |
A small patch to discuss, it's about killing an process in an out-of-memory condition. First from the code I don't see any prohibition that it kills init, if reaches maximum badness points, don't think thats something anybody anytime wants. Sure for desktop systems this very unlikely to ever occur, but for small embedded systems that could happen.
Second proposal is to give processes that are direct childs from init a special bonus, normally that are those we don't want to get killed. They are either important or get respawned eitherway creating an endless oom condition loop when killing them.
A position to think about is to generally bonus processes from their distance to init. The further down in the hirachy to more unlikely it is for the process to be important.
Greetings, Axel
diff -ru linux-2.4.20-org/mm/oom_kill.c linux-2.4.20/mm/oom_kill.c --- linux-2.4.20-org/mm/oom_kill.c Fri Nov 29 00:53:15 2002 +++ linux-2.4.20/mm/oom_kill.c Tue Feb 4 12:10:40 2003 @@ -62,6 +62,11 @@ if (!p->mm) return 0; /* + * Never kill init + */ + if (p->pid == 1) + return 0: + /* * The memory size of the process is the basis for the badness. */ points = p->mm->total_vm; @@ -101,6 +106,15 @@ */ if (cap_t(p->cap_effective) & CAP_TO_MASK(CAP_SYS_RAWIO)) points /= 4; + + /* + * Give childs from init a bonus, they usually get respawned + * eitherway, killing them might not help to solve the out of memory + * condition in the long run. + */ + if (p->p_pptr != NULL && p->p_pptr->pid == 1) + points /= 4; + #ifdef DEBUG printk(KERN_DEBUG "OOMkill: task %d (%s) got %d points\n", p->pid, p->comm, points); - 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/
|  |