From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <3F614C1F.6010802@nortelnetworks.com> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 00:31:27 -0400 From: Chris Friesen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [RFC] Enabling other oom schemes References: <200309120219.h8C2JANc004514@penguin.co.intel.com> <3F614912.3090801@genebrew.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Rahul Karnik Cc: rusty@linux.co.intel.com, riel@conectiva.com.br, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Rahul Karnik wrote: > Rusty Lynch wrote: > >> The patch below uses a notifier list for other components to register >> to be called when an out of memory condition occurs. > > > How does this interact with the overcommit handling? Doesn't strict > overcommit also not oom, but rather return a memory allocation error? > Could we not add another overcommit mode where oom conditions cause a > kernel panic? If you have real, true strict overcommit, then it can cause you to have errors much earlier than expected. Imagine a process that consumes 51% of memory. With strict overcommit, that process cannot fork() since there is not enough memory. Chris -- Chris Friesen | MailStop: 043/33/F10 Nortel Networks | work: (613) 765-0557 3500 Carling Avenue | fax: (613) 765-2986 Nepean, ON K2H 8E9 Canada | email: cfriesen@nortelnetworks.com -- 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: aart@kvack.org