Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 12 Mar 2000 01:14:02 -0500 (EST) | From | "Albert D. Cahalan" <> | Subject | Re: Some questions about linux kernel. |
| |
Khimenko Victor writes: > [chop] Rik van Riel (riel@conectiva.com.br) wrote:
>> On the contrary, putting together a solution to this >> problem is easy. > > It's not so. SOME solution is easy enough. But is it right solution ? > This is unclear. To many peoples ANY solution where ANY process can > be killed is "not right" -- theonly proper solution will be one where > you'll get NULL from malloc when there are not enough memory.
...and have a system lock-up when even that isn't enough.
I'd really like to see Rik's OOM kill code in 2.4.xx. It is a bug fix, with the current bug being that X can get killed.
>> The problem has been that people don't understand the issues involved >> and start a flamewar as soon as a patch (re)surfaces. > > Exactly.
Yep, and those people would be the ones who imagine that there is possible to avoid killing processes.
(the trouble: recursive code using the stack and kernel allocations)
> Ideal solution will be: solution where > 1) processes will be NEVER killed. > 2) if there are not enough memory malloc just return NULL. > 3) virtual memory is used effectively (that is almost 100% of memory+swap > can be used for "real data").
No problem. Do not boot Linux.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |