[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0910290136000.11476@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 01:38:24 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
cc: vedran.furac@...il.com, Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
minchan.kim@...il.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: Memory overcommit
On Wed, 28 Oct 2009, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> It's _not_ special to X.
>
> Almost all applications which uses many dynamica libraries can be affected by this,
> total_vm. And, as I explained to Vedran, multi-threaded program like Java can easily
> increase total_vm without using many anon_rss.
> And it's the reason I hate overcommit_memory. size of VM doesn't tell anything.
>
Right, because in Vedran's latest oom log it shows that Xorg is preferred
more than any other thread other than the memory hogging test program with
your patch than without. I pointed out a clear distinction in the killing
order using both total_vm and rss in that log and in my opinion killing
Xorg as opposed to krunner would be undesireable.
--
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