From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: [PATCH] VM fix for 2.4.0-test9 & OOM handler Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 22:10:36 +0100 (BST) In-Reply-To: from "Ingo Molnar" at Oct 09, 2000 10:06:02 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: From: Alan Cox Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: mingo@elte.hu Cc: Andrea Arcangeli , Rik van Riel , Byron Stanoszek , Linus Torvalds , MM mailing list , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > i think the OOM algorithm should not kill processes that have > child-processes, it should first kill child-less 'leaves'. Killing a > process that has child processes likely results in unexpected behavior of > those child-processes. (and equals to effective killing of those > child-processes as well.) Lets kill a 6 week long typical background compute job because netscape exploded (and yes netscape has a child process) Rik's current OOM killer works very well but its a heuristic, so like all heuristics you can always find a problem case Alan -- 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/