From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1163405AbWLGV1A (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Dec 2006 16:27:00 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1163406AbWLGV1A (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Dec 2006 16:27:00 -0500 Received: from zcars04e.nortel.com ([47.129.242.56]:35868 "EHLO zcars04e.nortel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1163405AbWLGV07 (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Dec 2006 16:26:59 -0500 Message-ID: <4578871C.2010309@nortel.com> Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2006 15:26:52 -0600 From: "Chris Friesen" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.7) Gecko/20050427 Red Hat/1.7.7-1.1.3.4 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Peter Zijlstra CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: additional oom-killer tuneable worth submitting? References: <45785DDD.3000503@nortel.com> <1165519292.14110.2.camel@lappy> In-Reply-To: <1165519292.14110.2.camel@lappy> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Dec 2006 21:27:03.0203 (UTC) FILETIME=[6FF9E730:01C71A46] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, 2006-12-07 at 12:30 -0600, Chris Friesen wrote: >>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. Currently we simply use mm->total_vm, same as the oom killer. Chris