Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261681AbTILEuc (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Sep 2003 00:50:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261680AbTILEuc (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Sep 2003 00:50:32 -0400 Received: from svr-ganmtc-appserv-mgmt.ncf.coxexpress.com ([24.136.46.5]:33295 "EHLO svr-ganmtc-appserv-mgmt.ncf.coxexpress.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261678AbTILEu0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Sep 2003 00:50:26 -0400 Subject: Re: [RFC] Enabling other oom schemes From: Robert Love To: rusty@linux.co.intel.com Cc: riel@conectiva.com.br, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <200309120219.h8C2JANc004514@penguin.co.intel.com> References: <200309120219.h8C2JANc004514@penguin.co.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1063342229.700.240.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.4 (1.4.4-5) Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 00:50:30 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 829 Lines: 23 On Thu, 2003-09-11 at 22:19, Rusty Lynch wrote: > The patch works (although by looking over oom_kill.c, I'm sure oom_panic.c > will panic too soon), but it is really only a quick hack to see how people > feel about such an approach. I like this a _lot_, it is something I have thought about doing, and something we have a need for at MontaVista. But I think its a lot more useful if we have alternative overcommit modes to use with it. An oom_nop might be a good idea. But some different policies, i.e. ones with more determinism but less smarts, are interesting. Robert Love - 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/