Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261851AbUDCSMV (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Apr 2004 13:12:21 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261857AbUDCSMV (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Apr 2004 13:12:21 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:65412 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261851AbUDCSMS (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Apr 2004 13:12:18 -0500 Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2004 13:12:07 -0500 (EST) From: Rik van Riel X-X-Sender: riel@chimarrao.boston.redhat.com To: Kurt Garloff cc: Andrew Morton , Linux kernel list Subject: Re: oom-killer adjustments In-Reply-To: <20040403000447.GU3328@tpkurt.garloff.de> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-ID: Content-Disposition: INLINE Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 677 Lines: 18 On Sat, 3 Apr 2004, Kurt Garloff wrote: > 1 << [-16 .. 15], thus allowing the sysadmin to mark the importance of > a process. Shouldn't such an adjustment be inherited at fork time, if we decide we want it in the kernel ? -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan - 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/