On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 7:32 PM, David Rientjes <rient...@google.com> wrote: > > I struggle to understand how the approach of randomly continuing to kill > more and more processes in the hope that it slows down usage of memory > reserves or that we get lucky is better.
Thank you to one and all for the feedback. I agree, in lieu of treating TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks as unkillable, and omitting them from the oom selection process, continuing the carnage is likely to result in more unpredictable results. At this time, I believe Oleg's solution of zapping the process memory use while it sleeps with the fatal signal enroute is ideal. Kyle Walker -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
