Re: OOM-killer too aggressive?

[Christoph Lameter]

On Sun, 27 Feb 2006, Andi Kleen wrote:

> Thinking about this more I think we need a __GFP_NOOOM for other
> purposes too. e.g. the x86-64 IOMMU code tries to do similar
> fallbacks and I suspect it will be hit by the OOM killer too.

Isnt this also a constrained allocation? We could expand the check to also 
catch these types of restrictions and fail.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/