[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090114231739.GB24111@kroah.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 15:17:39 -0800
From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To: Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>,
Brian Swetland <swetland@...gle.com>, arve@...gle.com,
San Mehat <san@...roid.com>, Robert Love <rlove@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: lowmemory android driver not needed?
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 02:26:48PM -0800, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 2:48 AM, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> >> Maybe our oom killer should get a new tunable, telling it how
> >> aggressive it should be, instead?
> >
> > I was thinking that, and it would integrate better with the OLPC work
> > (which IMHO is a nicer interface for some stuff)
> >
> > You'd want two thresholds
> >
> > The 'arghhhh....' point where you start killing stuff
> > The 'uh oh...' point where an OLPC style low memory notifier kicks in
>
> We actually use 6 different thresholds for killing processes. I don't
> know what all the classes are, processes with a higher oom_adj value
> can be killed with less impact to the user than processes with a lower
> oom_adj value. The first few classes only affect latency when
> switching apps, but later classes stop non critical background
> services and finally the foreground app. Another reason to not kill
> every process at the same threshold is that memory may not be free
> immediately when the process is killed.
But the lowmemorykiller android module doesn't have anything to do with
this, right?
thanks,
greg k-h
--
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