From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 16:06:19 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: Re: [PATCH] support for panic at OOM Message-Id: <20060412160619.31a3c027.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <20060411235907.6a59ecba.akpm@osdl.org> References: <20060412155301.10d611ca.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20060411235907.6a59ecba.akpm@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrew Morton Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, clameter@engr.sgi.com, riel@redhat.com, dgc@sgi.com List-ID: Hi, On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 23:59:07 -0700 Andrew Morton wrote: > KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > > > > This patch adds a feature to panic at OOM, oom_die. > > Makes sense I guess. > Thanks, > > @@ -718,6 +719,14 @@ static ctl_table vm_table[] = { > > .proc_handler = &proc_dointvec, > > }, > > { > > + .ctl_name = VM_OOM_DIE, > > + .procname = "oom_die", > > I'd suggest it be called "panic_on_oom". Like the current panic_on_oops. > I'll chage. > > +int sysctl_oom_die = 0; > > The initialisation is unneeded. > Okay, > > + if (sysctl_oom_die) > > + oom_die(); > > I don't think we need a separate function for this? > Hmm.. okay. I'll put panic("Panic: out of memory: panic_on_oom is 1.") directly. > Please document the new sysctl in Documentation/sysctl/. > I'll do. Thanks, -Kame -- 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-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org