[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201002102234.38377.l.lunak@suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 22:34:38 +0100
From: Lubos Lunak <l.lunak@...e.cz>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: Improving OOM killer
On Wednesday 10 of February 2010, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 02/10/2010 03:54 PM, Lubos Lunak wrote:
> > Simply computing the cost of the whole children subtree (or a
> > reasonable approximation) avoids the need for any magic numbers and gives
> > a much better representation of how costly the subtree is, since, well,
> > it is the cost itself.
>
> That assumes you want to kill off that entire tree.
As said in another mail, I think I actually do, since the entire tree is
indentified as the problem. But regardless of that, surely computing the cost
of a forkbomb by computing something that is close to the actual cost of it
is better than trying magic numbers?
--
Lubos Lunak
openSUSE Boosters team, KDE developer
l.lunak@...e.cz , l.lunak@....org
--
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