Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 11:34:33 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 11:34:22 -0500 Received: from ns.caldera.de ([212.34.180.1]:30987 "EHLO ns.caldera.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 11:34:15 -0500 Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 17:03:54 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Rik van Riel Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: KPATCH] Reserve VM for root (was: Re: Looking for better VM) Message-ID: <20001116170354.A9501@caldera.de> Mail-Followup-To: Rik van Riel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: ; from riel@conectiva.com.br on Thu, Nov 16, 2000 at 01:51:01PM -0200 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 16, 2000 at 01:51:01PM -0200, Rik van Riel wrote: > > If you think fork() kills the box then ulimit the maximum number > > of user processes (ulimit -u). This is a different issue and a > > bad design in the scheduler (see e.g. Tru64 for a better one). > > My fair scheduler catches this one just fine. It hasn't > been integrated in the kernel yet, but both VA Linux and > Conectiva use it in their kernel RPM. BTW: do you have a fairsched patch for 2.4? Christoph -- Always remember that you are unique. Just like everyone else. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/