Re: [PATCH] VM fix for 2.4.0-test9 & OOM handler

From: bert hubert (ahu@ds9a.nl)
Date: Mon Oct 09 2000 - 18:35:23 EST

Next message: Alan Cox: "Re: Calling current() from interrupt context"
Previous message: Jeff V. Merkey: "Re: MAX iso9660 size?"
In reply to: Linus Torvalds: "Re: [PATCH] VM fix for 2.4.0-test9 & OOM handler"
Next in thread: Rik van Riel: "Re: [PATCH] VM fix for 2.4.0-test9 & OOM handler"
Reply: Rik van Riel: "Re: [PATCH] VM fix for 2.4.0-test9 & OOM handler"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Mon, Oct 09, 2000 at 02:38:10PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> So the process that gave X the bitmap dies. What now? Are we going to
> depend on X un-counting the resources?
>
> I'd prefer just X having a higher "mm nice level" or something.

I wonder how many megabytes we can fill with all messages about an OOM
killer. I remember threads about this from '94 onwards. Perhaps we can
finally have a sane one now :-)

Regards,

bert hubert

-- 
PowerDNS                     Versatile DNS Services  
Trilab                       The Technology People   
'SYN! .. SYN|ACK! .. ACK!' - the mating call of the internet
-
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/

Next message: Alan Cox: "Re: Calling current() from interrupt context"
Previous message: Jeff V. Merkey: "Re: MAX iso9660 size?"
In reply to: Linus Torvalds: "Re: [PATCH] VM fix for 2.4.0-test9 & OOM handler"
Next in thread: Rik van Riel: "Re: [PATCH] VM fix for 2.4.0-test9 & OOM handler"
Reply: Rik van Riel: "Re: [PATCH] VM fix for 2.4.0-test9 & OOM handler"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Oct 15 2000 - 21:00:14 EST