Re: OOM killer???

[Ingo Oeser]

On Tue, Mar 27, 2001 at 03:24:16PM +0200, Martin Dalecki wrote:
> > @@ -93,6 +95,10 @@
> >                                 p->uid == 0 || p->euid == 0)
> >                 points /= 4;
> > 
> > +       /* Much the same goes for processes with low UIDs */
> > +       if(p->uid < 100 || p->euid < 100)
> > +         points /= 2;
> > +
> 
> Plase change to 100 to 500 - this would make it consistant with
> the useradd command, which starts adding new users at the UID 500

No, useradd reads usally the /etc/login.defs to select the range.
The oom-killer should have configurables for that, to allow the
policy decisions in USER space -- where it belongs -- not in KERNEL space

If we use my OOM killer API, this patch would be a module and
could have module parameters to select that.

Johnathan: I URGE you to apply my patch before adding OOM killer
   stuff. What's wrong with it, that you cannot use it? ;-)

It is easy to add configurables to a module and play with them
WITHOUT recompiling.

Dynamic sysctl tables would also be possible, IF we had an value
that is DEFINED to be invalid for sysctrl(2) and only valid for /proc.

It is also better to include the egid into the decision. There
are deamons, that I defintely want to be killed on a workstation,
but not on a server.

e.g. My important matlab calculation, which runs in user mode
should not be killed. But killing a local webserver, which serves
my help system is ok (because I will not loose work, and might
get it over the net, if there is a problem).

So as Rik stated: The OOM killer cannot suit all people, so it
has to be configurable, to be OOM kill, not overkill ;-)

Thanks & Regards

Ingo Oeser
-- 
10.+11.03.2001 - 3. Chemnitzer LinuxTag <http://www.tu-chemnitz.de/linux/tag>
         <<<<<<<<<<<<     been there and had much fun   >>>>>>>>>>>>