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

[Rik van Riel]

On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, James Sutherland wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > 
> > > > so dns helper is killed first, then netscape. (my idea might not
> > > > make sense though.)
> > > 
> > > It makes some sense, but I don't think OOM is something that
> > > occurs often enough to care about it /that/ much...
> > 
> > i'm trying to handle Andrea's case, the init=/bin/bash manual-bootup case,
> > with 4MB RAM and no swap, where the admin tries to exec a 2MB process. I
> > think it's a legitimate concern - i cannot know in advance whether a
> > freshly started process would trigger an OOM or not.
> 
> Shouldn't the runtime factor handle this, making sure the new
> process is killed? (Maybe not if you're almost OOM right from
> the word go, and run this process straight off... Hrm.)

It should.

Also, the example is a tad unrealistic since init seems to be
around 70 kB in size on my systems ;)

regards,

Rik
--
"What you're running that piece of shit Gnome?!?!"
       -- Miguel de Icaza, UKUUG 2000

http://www.conectiva.com/               http://www.surriel.com/

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/