Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Cgroup based OOM killer controller

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

Hi Evgeniy,

> On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 11:51:27PM -0800, David Rientjes (rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> > Yeah, I proposed /dev/mem_notify being made as a client of cgroups there 
> > in http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123200623628685
> > 
> > How do you replace the oom killer's capability of giving a killed task 
> > access to memory reserves with TIF_MEMDIE in userspace?
> 
> /dev/mem_notify is a great idea, but please do not limit existing
> oom-killer in its ability to do the job and do not rely on application's
> ability to send a SIGKILL which will not kill tasks in unkillable state
> contrary to oom-killer.

I'd like to respect your requiremnt. but I also would like to know
why you like deterministic hierarchy oom than notification.

I think one of problem is, current patch description is a bit poor
and don't describe from administrator view.

Could you please sort the discssion out and explain your requirement detail?
otherwise (I guess) this discussion don't reach people agreement.

I don't like the implementation idea vs another idea discussion.
it often don't make productive discussion.
I'd like to sort out people requrement.
otherwise I can't review the patch fill requirement or not.



--
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/