Re: OOM policy, overcommit control, and soft limits

[Andrea Righi]

Chris Frey wrote:
> I'm sure someone has thought of this before me.  Does anything remotely
> similar to this already exist?  I've googled for OOM policy, but so far
> all I've seen is Rusty Lynch's patch from 2003, and really, I want this
> behaviour to happen when there is still a bit of memory left, so things
> can be dealt with before they are OOM-level dire.

Have you seen the OOM killer policy implemented in memory the resource
controller?
http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_2_6_25#head-450b26e12955b8035a05cf07b3f31c501ee4bfab

BTW read the TODO comment in this commit log... ;-)
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=c7ba5c9e8176704bfac0729875fa62798037584d

Maybe a possible solution could be to just run critical and non-critical
applications in 2 different cgroups, using different memory policies.
Anyway, userspace OOM handling would surely permit to implement more
interesting features.

-Andrea
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/