From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 22:44:39 +0200 From: Andrea Arcangeli Subject: Re: [PATCH] VM fix for 2.4.0-test9 & OOM handler Message-ID: <20001009224439.L19583@athlon.random> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: ; from jas88@cam.ac.uk on Mon, Oct 09, 2000 at 09:38:08PM +0100 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: James Sutherland Cc: Ingo Molnar , Rik van Riel , Andi Kleen , Byron Stanoszek , Linus Torvalds , MM mailing list , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Oct 09, 2000 at 09:38:08PM +0100, James Sutherland wrote: > Shouldn't the runtime factor handle this, making sure the new process is The runtime factor in the algorithm will make the first difference only after lots lots of time (and the run_time can as well be wrong because of jiffies wrap around). But even if it would make a difference after 1 second, there would be a 1 second window where init can be killed. Andrea -- 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/