Re: [RFC] Enabling other oom schemes

[Robert Love]

On Thu, 2003-09-11 at 22:19, Rusty Lynch wrote:

> The patch works (although by looking over oom_kill.c, I'm sure oom_panic.c
> will panic too soon), but it is really only a quick hack to see how people
> feel about such an approach.

I like this a _lot_, it is something I have thought about doing, and
something we have a need for at MontaVista.

But I think its a lot more useful if we have alternative overcommit
modes to use with it.

An oom_nop might be a good idea.  But some different policies, i.e. ones
with more determinism but less smarts, are interesting.

	Robert Love


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/