Re: oom killer and its superior braindamage in 2.4

• Next message: Rik van Riel: "[PATCH][TRIVIAL] don't let OOM killer kill same process repeatedly"
• Previous message: Martin J. Bligh: "Re: Minutes from Feb 21 LSE Call"
• In reply to: David Mansfield: "Re: oom killer and its superior braindamage in 2.4"
• Next in thread: Faik Uygur: "Re: oom killer and its superior braindamage in 2.4"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Sun, 23 Feb 2003, David Mansfield wrote:

> So you're saying that a process can stay in the D state, without ever
> getting enough resources to complete a single Uninteruptible wait, for
> hours at a time?

Or even in the R state, but that would only happen when there
is a kernel bug. The OOM killer can do nothing but hope for
the best and try another process if the first one doesn't want
to exit.

> Ok. Now I understand your patch. Thanks for the info.
>
> You should push your patch to Marcelo.

Will do.

cheers,

Rik

-- 
Engineers don't grow up, they grow sideways.
http://www.surriel.com/		http://kernelnewbies.org/
-
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/

• Next message: Rik van Riel: "[PATCH][TRIVIAL] don't let OOM killer kill same process repeatedly"
• Previous message: Martin J. Bligh: "Re: Minutes from Feb 21 LSE Call"
• In reply to: David Mansfield: "Re: oom killer and its superior braindamage in 2.4"
• Next in thread: Faik Uygur: "Re: oom killer and its superior braindamage in 2.4"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Feb 23 2003 - 22:00:39 EST