DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=sender:message-id:date:from:reply-to:organization:user-agent
         :mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:x-age:x-location
         :x-os:x-face:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=kNCItLRxP7xFiCxy8rYBwYTMBEAng1zE/kk/isVxU5yWP7i6E/N/cpOPShQXCIbhi5
         fXWOxntGEzlMtptxBw6PEepPCWH8k30rrWsqOUk3HdC6PrKycuorBZjP1OWNgigpYMLG
         o4mLPr92676af9p46Kve9we7sVT+vPATSEqck=
Message-ID: <4AE792B8.5020806@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 01:39:20 +0100
From: =?UTF-8?B?VmVkcmFuIEZ1cmHEjQ==?= <vedran.furac@gmail.com>
Reply-To: vedran.furac@gmail.com
Organization: Home
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.8.1.22) Gecko/20090701 Thunderbird/2.0.0.22 Mnenhy/0.7.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
CC: Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk>,
       KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>, minchan.kim@gmail.com,
       Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
       Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Memory overcommit
References: <hav57c$rso$1@ger.gmane.org> <20091013120840.a844052d.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <hb2cfu$r08$2@ger.gmane.org> <20091014135119.e1baa07f.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <4ADE3121.6090407@gmail.com> <20091026105509.f08eb6a3.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <4AE5CB4E.4090504@gmail.com> <20091027122213.f3d582b2.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0910271843510.11372@sister.anvils> <alpine.DEB.2.00.0910271351140.9183@chino.kir.corp.google.com> <4AE78B8F.9050201@gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.00.0910271723180.17615@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0910271723180.17615@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 821
Lines: 24

David Rientjes wrote:

> This is wrong; it doesn't "emulate oom" since oom_kill_process() always 
> kills a child of the selected process instead if they do not share the 
> same memory.  The chosen task in that case is untouched.

OK, I stand corrected then. Thanks! But, while testing this I lost X
once again and "test" survived for some time (check the timestamps):

http://pastebin.com/d5c9d026e

- It started by killing gkrellm(!!!)
- Then I lost X (kdeinit4 I guess)
- Then 103 seconds after the killing started, it killed "test" - the
real culprit.

I mean... how?!


--
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/