On 12 Mar 2000, Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
> > It's not so. SOME solution is easy enough. But is it right solution ?
> > This is unclear. To many peoples ANY solution where ANY process can
> > be killed is "not right" -- theonly proper solution will be one where
> > you'll get NULL from malloc when there are not enough memory.
>
> ...and have a system lock-up when even that isn't enough.
>
> I'd really like to see Rik's OOM kill code in 2.4.xx. It is a bug fix,
> with the current bug being that X can get killed.
It would be even nicer if support for per-user/group ulimits were in 2.4,
as currently only per-process limits are supported by bash/PAM. This would
solve the "X-gets-killed" problem, as long as you're not logged in as
root.
Of course, this wouldn't change the fact that most distros don't even
bother setting ulimits out of the box.
-ed
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Mar 15 2000 - 21:00:23 EST