> Naturally this is all still in the vaporware stage, but I think that
> if implemented the concept might at least improve the OOM/low-memory
> situation considerably. Starting to fail allocations for the cluster
> programs (including their kernel allocations) well before failing
> them for the swap-fallback tool would help the original poster, and I
> imagine various tweaked priorities would make true OOM-deadlock far
> less likely.
The problem is that deadlocks can happen even without anybody
running out of virtual memory. The deadlocks GFP_CRITICAL
was supposed to handle are deadlocks while swapping out data
because the swapping on some devices needs more memory by itself.
This happens long before anything is running into a true oom.
It's just that the memory cleaning stage cannot make progress
anymore.
Your proposal isn't addressing this problem at all I think.
Handling true OOM is a quite different issue.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
