From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756702Ab0E1PWi (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 May 2010 11:22:38 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:58188 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750920Ab0E1PWh convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 May 2010 11:22:37 -0400 Subject: Re: [RFC] oom-kill: give the dying task a higher priority From: Peter Zijlstra To: Minchan Kim Cc: "Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" , KOSAKI Motohiro , balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Oleg Nesterov , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Thomas Gleixner , David Rientjes , Mel Gorman , williams@redhat.com In-Reply-To: <20100528151249.GB12035@barrios-desktop> References: <20100528143605.7E2A.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <20100528145329.7E2D.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <20100528125305.GE11364@uudg.org> <20100528140623.GA11041@barrios-desktop> <20100528143617.GF11364@uudg.org> <20100528151249.GB12035@barrios-desktop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 17:21:43 +0200 Message-ID: <1275060103.27810.9651.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 2010-05-29 at 00:12 +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > I think highest RT proirity ins't good solution. > As I mentiond, Some RT functions don't want to be preempted by other processes > which cause memory pressure. It makes RT task broken. All the patches I've seen use MAX_RT_PRIO-1, which is actually FIFO-1, which is the lowest RT priority.