linux-kernel - Re: [why oom_adj does not work] Re: Linux killed Kenny, bastard!

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: <20090113140627.507f15e1@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date:	Tue, 13 Jan 2009 14:06:27 +0000
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net>
Cc:	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [why oom_adj does not work] Re: Linux killed Kenny, bastard!

> Do you _REALLY_ think anyone can calculate it yourself and then properly
> calculate adjustment used to properly select oom-killed process?

Its always a heuristic.

> So far my patch is the sanest way to deal with the OOM selection

No. You keep maintaining this but your crude hack is useless in a non
co-operative environment, has lots of issue with name aliasing and
doesn't deal with real needs.

We have container interfaces that can do this and far more and do them
right. In fact the very start of all the OpenVZ and container work years
ago was the beancounter patches which were addressed at exactly this
problem (although more specifically 'making sure undergraduates processes
get killed first')

Alan
--
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/