From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from max.fys.ruu.nl (max.fys.ruu.nl [131.211.32.73]) by kvack.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA18924 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 1997 07:32:11 -0500 Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 12:53:36 +0100 (MET) From: Rik van Riel Reply-To: H.H.vanRiel@fys.ruu.nl Subject: Re: Recipe for cooking 2.1.72's mm In-Reply-To: <19971216091554.50382@Elf.mj.gts.cz> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Pavel Machek Cc: linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu, linux-mm List-ID: On Tue, 16 Dec 1997, Pavel Machek wrote: > Sorry. There is a problem. It needs to be solved, not worked > around. (Notice, that same process does nothing bad to 2.0.28). On my system, it just gives one or two out-of-memory kills of random processes. I'd really like it if those processes would be a little less random... Killing kerneld or crond (or X... remember those poor stateless-vga-card users) is IMHO worse than killing a program from some USER. Finding the most hoggy non-root process group and killing some of it's programs shouldn't be too difficult. btw: I'm using 2.1.66 with my mmap-age patch... > And: Work around is bad. Imagine your machine with such behaviour on > 100MBit ethernet. Imagine me around (ping -f)ing your machine. That > can keep your pages low for as long as I want. You do not your machine > to go yo-yo (up and down and up and down ...). Ok, so we should limit the amount of memory the kernel can grab for internal usage... Sysctl-wise of course, because some people have special purpose routing machines. Rik. +-----------------------------+------------------------------+ | For Linux mm-patches, go to | "I'm busy managing memory.." | | my homepage (via LinuxHQ). | H.H.vanRiel@fys.ruu.nl | | ...submissions welcome... | http://www.fys.ruu.nl/~riel/ | +-----------------------------+------------------------------+