linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] oom-kill: add lowmem usage aware oom kill handling

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]

Date:	Fri, 29 Jan 2010 16:30:30 +0000
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	"KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki" <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	vedran.furac@...il.com,
	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>, rientjes@...gle.com,
	minchan.kim@...il.com,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] oom-kill: add lowmem usage aware oom kill handling

> > Ultimately it is policy. The kernel simply can't read minds.
> >
> If so, all heuristics other than vm_size should be purged, I think.
> ...Or victim should be just determined by the class of application
> user sets. oom_adj other than OOM_DISABLE, searching victim process
> by black magic are all garbage.

oom_adj by value makes sense as do some of the basic heuristics - but a
lot of the complexity I would agree is completely nonsensical.

There are folks who use oom_adj weightings to influence things (notably
embedded and desktop). The embedded world would actually benefit on the
whole if the oom_adj was an absolute value because they usually know
precisely what they want to die and in what order.

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/