On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 12:41:03PM -0800, David Rientjes (rient...@google.com)
wrote:
> > Having some special application which will monitor /dev/mem_notify and
> > kill processes based on its own hueristics is a good idea, but when it
> > fails to do its work (or does not exist) system has to have ability to
> > make a progress and invoke a main oom-killer.
>
> Agreed, very similiar to the cgroup oom notifier patch that invokes the
> oom killer if there are no attached tasks waiting to handle the situation.
>
> In this case, it would be a configurable delay to allow userspace to act
> in response to oom conditions before invoking the kernel oom killer. So
> instead of thinking of this as a userspace replacement for the oom killer,
> it simply preempts it if userspace can provide more memory, including the
> possibility of killing tasks itself.
How different may look idea expressed by the different phrases and cold
heads :)
--
Evgeniy Polyakov
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
contain...@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel@openvz.org
https://openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
