[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090122232532.GA5656@ioremap.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 02:25:32 +0300
From: Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc: Nikanth Karthikesan <knikanth@...e.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Chris Snook <csnook@...hat.com>,
Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Cgroup based OOM killer controller
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 01:53:04AM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov (zbr@...emap.net) wrote:
> > I'm quite certain you've spent more time writing emails to me than merging
> > the patch and testing its possibilities, given your lack of understanding
> > of its very basic concepts.
>
> How cute :)
> Any other technical arguments of the same strength?
Its my turn now for the professional statements, let's start with this
technical side: you wanted to send a signal for the process to be killed,
but this will need
1. to allocate a signal, which will deadlock
2. no need to do this for sigill, but it will not work if process is in
unkillable state, while oom-killer clears iirc
Now to the oom-handler: if it will want to free some memory, it will
have to call a syscall with some pointer, which in turn may be in the
swapped area, so handler will be locked.
--
Evgeniy Polyakov
--
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