| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20090114104307.GA20451@elf.ucw.cz> Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 11:43:07 +0100 From: Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz> To: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com> Cc: Arve Hj?nnev?g <arve@...roid.com>, Brian Swetland <swetland@...gle.com>, arve@...gle.com, San Mehat <san@...roid.com>, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Robert Love <rlove@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: lowmemory android driver not needed? On Tue 2009-01-13 19:52:37, Greg KH wrote: > On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 06:30:39PM -0800, Arve Hj?nnev?g wrote: > > The oom killer does not kick in until all caches are emptied. Our user > > space code changes the oom_adj value of processes that are no longer > > in the foreground so that they killed first (the process saves its > > state but does not exit). To avoid excessive demand paging, the low > > memory killer will kill these processes when the memory available > > drops below a threshold. > > That makes sense. Can you provide a bit of documentation that I can > include in the driver so that people can actually use the thing? :) > > Alan, does this sound like it should remain in the tree? Maybe our oom killer should get a new tunable, telling it how aggressive it should be, instead? Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- 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