Re: [PATCH] VM fix for 2.4.0-test9 & OOM handler

[Ed Tomlinson <tomlins@cam.org>]

On Mon, 09 Oct 2000, Mark Hahn wrote:
> > feature. Rather introduce a orthogonal voluntary "importance"
> > system-call, which marks processes as more and less important. This is
> > similar to priority, it can only be decreased by ordinary users.
>
> nice!  call it CAP_IMPORTANT ;)
> come to think of it, I'm not sure more than one bit would be terribly
> useful - no any sane person is going to spend time
> sorting all their processes by importance...

What about the AIX way?  When the system is nearly OOM it sends a
SIG_DANGER signal to all processes.  Those that handle the signal are not 
initial targets for OOM...  Also in the SIG_DANGER processing they can take 
there own actions to reduce their memory usage... (we would have to look out 
for a SIG_DANGER handler that had a memory leak though)

Ed Tomlinson 
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux.eu.org/Linux-MM/