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

[David Rientjes]

On Tue, 27 Jan 2009, Nikanth Karthikesan wrote:

> > I don't understand what you're arguing for here.  Are you suggesting that
> > we should not prefer tasks that intersect the set of allowable nodes?
> > That makes no sense if the goal is to allow for future memory freeing.
> >
> 
> No. Actually I am just wondering, will it be possible to check whether a 
> particular task has memory allocated or mmaped from this node to avoid killing 
> an innocent task.

That's certainly idealistic, but cannot be done in an inexpensive way that 
would scale with the large systems that clients of cpusets typically use.
--
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/