Werner Almesberger wrote: > Michael 'Mickey' Lauer wrote: > >> I would not protest on removing the system runlevel 6 trigger, >> > > Good, that's already half the messiness :-) > > >> however I >> would certainly veto on removing the 8 seconds emergency shutdown, since >> that's for cases where userland is entirely unresponsive (no daemon to >> catch that state expected). >> > > Hmm, how about solving the problem that the daemon is unresponsive > instead ? > > If you separate it from the rest of the framework, the code will be > simple, small, and won't break easily because of some unrelated > changes. If you mlockall, you're immune to out of memory conditions > or a file system failure. If you raise the scheduling priority high > enough, you'll win even against fork bombs.
Like a watchdog process?
