Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 27 Mar 2001 22:22:15 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 27 Mar 2001 22:22:05 -0500 Received: from 3-123.cwb-adsl.telepar.net.br ([200.193.162.123]:530 "EHLO imladris.rielhome.conectiva") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 27 Mar 2001 22:21:58 -0500 Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 00:21:01 -0300 (BRST) From: Rik van Riel To: Doug Ledford cc: james , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Ideas for the oom problem In-Reply-To: <3AC13ADD.1341E7AE@redhat.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1009 Lines: 29 On Tue, 27 Mar 2001, Doug Ledford wrote: > I've been using our internal tree for my testing, and I'm reluctant to > let my experiences there cause me to draw conclusions about other > trees. So, will you please tell me which version of the kernel you > think has a vm that only triggers the oom killer in emergency > situations so I can test it here to see if you are right? Detecting WHEN we're OOM is quite unrelated from chosing WHAT to do when we're OOM. There is currently no kernel that I'm aware of which does the OOM kill at the "exact right" moment. regards, Rik -- Virtual memory is like a game you can't win; However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose... http://www.surriel.com/ http://www.conectiva.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com.br/ - 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/