Re: Avoiding OOM on overcommit...?

From: Peter T. Breuer (ptb@it.uc3m.es)
Date: Mon Mar 27 2000 - 03:47:43 EST


"A month of sundays ago Richard Gooch wrote:"
> Look, I think it would be nice you you could provably ensure that
> processes can be made safe from OOM. Some people will like that. But
> until a lightweight, effective scheme is proposed that can support it,
> I think we should steer clear of ad-hoc solutions that only give half
> guarantees. It's better not to claim something at all than claim it
> and people find out later it's not true.

I believe that physical backing in swap for a processes stack pages is
such a guarantee.

Peter

-
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/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 31 2000 - 21:00:19 EST