Re: [patch -mm v2] mm: introduce oom_adj_child

[Paul Menage <menage@google.com>]

On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 1:26 PM, David Rientjes<rientjes@google.com> wrote:
>
> It's more likely than not that applications were probably written to the
> way the documentation described the two files: that is, adjust
> /proc/pid/oom_score by tuning /proc/pid/oom_adj

I'd actually be pretty surprised if anyone was really doing that -
don't forget that the oom_score is something that varies dynamically
depending on things like the VM size of the process, its running time,
the VM sizes of its children, etc. So tuning oom_adj based on
oom_score will be rapidly out of date. AFAIK, oom_score was added
initially as a way to debug the OOM killer, and oom_adj was added
later as an additional knob. My suspicion is that any automated users
of oom_adj are working along the lines of

http://www.google.com/codesearch/p?hl=en&sa=N&cd=4&ct=rc#X7-oBZ_RyNM/src/server/memory/base/oommanager.cpp&q=oom_score

which just uses the values -16, 0 or 15, depending on whether the
process is critical, important or expendable.

Paul

--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>