From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Chris Friesen <cfriesen@nortel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: additional oom-killer tuneable worth submitting?
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2006 20:21:32 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1165519292.14110.2.camel@lappy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <45785DDD.3000503@nortel.com>
On Thu, 2006-12-07 at 12:30 -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:
> The kernel currently has a way to adjust the oom-killer score via
> /proc/<pid>/oomadj.
>
> However, to adjust this effectively requires knowledge of the scores of
> all the other processes on the system.
>
> I'd like to float an idea (which we've implemented and been using for
> some time) where the semantics are slightly different:
>
> We add a new "oom_thresh" member to the task struct.
> We introduce a new proc entry "/proc/<pid>/oomthresh" to control it.
>
> The "oom-thresh" value maps to the max expected memory consumption for
> that process. As long as a process uses less memory than the specified
> threshold, then it is immune to the oom-killer.
You would need to specify the measure of memory used by your process;
see the (still not resolved) RSS debate.
> On an embedded platform this allows the designer to engineer the system
> and protect critical apps based on their expected memory consumption.
> If one of those apps goes crazy and starts chewing additional memory
> then it becomes vulnerable to the oom killer while the other apps remain
> protected.
>
> If a patch for the above feature was submitted, would there be any
> chance of getting it included? Maybe controlled by a config option?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-12-07 19:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-12-07 18:30 additional oom-killer tuneable worth submitting? Chris Friesen
2006-12-07 18:50 ` Jesper Juhl
2006-12-07 21:25 ` Chris Friesen
2006-12-07 21:37 ` Jesper Juhl
2006-12-07 21:57 ` Chris Friesen
2006-12-07 22:25 ` Jesper Juhl
2006-12-07 19:21 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2006-12-07 21:26 ` Chris Friesen
2006-12-07 23:22 ` Alan
2006-12-07 23:21 ` Chris Friesen
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-12-08 13:58 Al Boldi
2006-12-08 14:56 ` Alan
2006-12-08 15:19 ` Al Boldi
2006-12-08 15:55 ` Alan
2006-12-08 16:59 ` Al Boldi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1165519292.14110.2.camel@lappy \
--to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=cfriesen@nortel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox