linux-kernel - Re: OOM policy, overcommit control, and soft limits

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20080531141529.2a5c085a@core>
Date:	Sat, 31 May 2008 14:15:29 +0100
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Chris Frey <cdfrey@...rsquare.net>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: OOM policy, overcommit control, and soft limits

> I'm sure someone has thought of this before me.  Does anything remotely
> similar to this already exist?  I've googled for OOM policy, but so far
> all I've seen is Rusty Lynch's patch from 2003, and really, I want this
> behaviour to happen when there is still a bit of memory left, so things
> can be dealt with before they are OOM-level dire.

Not that I am aware of. However you can set priorities on OOM killing
order and there is a patch from the XO people which seems to have
vanished into the darkness which added a nice memory pressure notifier so
apps could respond to memory shortages intelligently (eg by cleaning up)

--
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/