On Sat 06-02-16 22:22:20, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Michal Hocko wrote:
> > There is one notable exception to this, though, if the OOM victim was
> > in the process of coredumping the result would be incomplete. This is
> > considered a reasonable constrain because the overall system health is
> > more
Michal Hocko wrote:
> There is one notable exception to this, though, if the OOM victim was
> in the process of coredumping the result would be incomplete. This is
> considered a reasonable constrain because the overall system health is
> more important than debugability of a particular application
On Wed 03-02-16 15:48:18, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Feb 2016, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> > From: Michal Hocko
> >
> > This is based on the idea from Mel Gorman discussed during LSFMM 2015 and
> > independently brought up by Oleg Nesterov.
> >
> > The OOM killer currently allows to kill onl
On Wed, 3 Feb 2016, Michal Hocko wrote:
> From: Michal Hocko
>
> This is based on the idea from Mel Gorman discussed during LSFMM 2015 and
> independently brought up by Oleg Nesterov.
>
> The OOM killer currently allows to kill only a single task in a good
> hope that the task will terminate in
From: Michal Hocko
This is based on the idea from Mel Gorman discussed during LSFMM 2015 and
independently brought up by Oleg Nesterov.
The OOM killer currently allows to kill only a single task in a good
hope that the task will terminate in a reasonable time and frees up its
memory. Such a tas
5 matches
Mail list logo