Re: Memory overcommit

[David Rientjes]

On Wed, 28 Oct 2009, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:

> All kernel engineers know "than expected or not" can be never known to the kernel.
> So, oom_adj workaround is used now. (by some special users.)
> OOM Killer itself is also a workaround, too.
> "No kill" is the best thing but we know there are tend to be memory-leaker on bad
> systems and all systems in this world are not perfect.
> 

Right, and historically that has been addressed by considering total_vm 
and adjusting it with oom_adj so that we can identify memory leaking tasks 
through user-defined criteria.

> Yes, some more trustable values other than vmsize/rss/time are appriciated.
> I wonder recent memory consumption speed can be an another key value.
> 

Sounds very logical.

> Anyway, current bahavior of "killing X" is a bad thing.
> We need some fixes.
> 

You can easily protect X with OOM_DISABLE, as you know.  I don't think we 
need any X-specific heuristics added to the kernel, it looks like the 
special cases have already polluted badness() enough.
--
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/