From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ed Tomlinson Subject: Re: [PATCH] VM fix for 2.4.0-test9 & OOM handler Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 13:47:28 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <00100913472801.03825@oscar> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Mark Hahn , Ingo Molnar Cc: Marco Colombo , Rik van Riel , linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Mon, 09 Oct 2000, Mark Hahn wrote: > > feature. Rather introduce a orthogonal voluntary "importance" > > system-call, which marks processes as more and less important. This is > > similar to priority, it can only be decreased by ordinary users. > > nice! call it CAP_IMPORTANT ;) > come to think of it, I'm not sure more than one bit would be terribly > useful - no any sane person is going to spend time > sorting all their processes by importance... What about the AIX way? When the system is nearly OOM it sends a SIG_DANGER signal to all processes. Those that handle the signal are not initial targets for OOM... Also in the SIG_DANGER processing they can take there own actions to reduce their memory usage... (we would have to look out for a SIG_DANGER handler that had a memory leak though) Ed Tomlinson -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux.eu.org/Linux-MM/