From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from hoboe1bl1.telenet-ops.be ([195.130.137.72]:60257 "EHLO hoboe1bl1.telenet-ops.be" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S939162AbXGSOOx (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jul 2007 10:14:53 -0400 Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 16:14:50 +0200 (CEST) From: Geert Uytterhoeven Subject: Re: [PATCH for review] [11/48] x86_64: During VM oom condition, kill all threads in process group In-Reply-To: <20070719140411.GD16279@infradead.org> Message-ID: References: <20070719348.540885000@suse.de> <20070719134840.47B5114E6E@wotan.suse.de> <20070719140411.GD16279@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Andi Kleen , will_schmidt@vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 03:48:40PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > From: Will Schmidt > > > > During a VM oom condition, kill all threads in the process group. > > > > We have had complaints where a threaded application is left in a bad state > > after one of it's threads is killed when we hit a VM: out_of_memory condition. > > > > Killing just one of the process threads can leave the application in a bad > > state, whereas killing the entire process group would allow for the > > application to restart, or otherwise handled, and makes it very obvious that > > something has gone wrong. > > > > This change allows the entire process group to be taken down, rather than just > > the one thread. > > Shouldn't we have one patc hthat does this for every architecture instead > of going through arch maintainers and probably losing half of them? Yes, please ;-) Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org return -EMAINTAINER_TOO_BUSY