[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0704172152450.2877@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 21:54:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To: Larry Woodman <lwoodman@...hat.com>
cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sysctl_panic_on_oom broken
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007, Larry Woodman wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-04-17 at 14:39 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>
> >
> > It recreates the old problem that we OOM while we still have memory
> > in other parts of the system.
>
> How, by the time we get here we have already decided we are going to
> OOMkill or panic. This change just obeys sysctl_panic_on_oom before
> killing current.
If you panic then there is no reason to kill current. Lets say you
have a 10 node system and the application attempt to allocate from node 8
which has no reclaimable memory then the application has a problem not the
system as a whole.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists