|| ||Alan Cox <alan-AT-lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> |
|| ||Ingo Molnar <mingo-AT-elte.hu> |
|| ||Re: [RFC] ipc: introduce shm_rmid_forced sysctl |
|| ||Sun, 3 Jul 2011 22:25:39 +0100|
|| ||Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon-AT-openwall.com>, solar-AT-openwall.com,
Andrew Morton <akpm-AT-linux-foundation.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap-AT-xenotime.net>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm-AT-xmission.com>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge.hallyn-AT-canonical.com>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano-AT-free.fr>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg-AT-redhat.com>, Tejun Heo <tj-AT-kernel.org>,
|| ||Article, Thread
> This is a simple extension of the OOM killer being able to ... kill
> things on OOM, ok? 'to kill' implies 'to break'.
If you do it on the OOM killer then yes that aspect makes sense. The real
problem is that Linux has shipped a broken default for the past ten years.
The number of times I have to explain to industrial and business
customers that Linux doesn't suck but the defaults are stupid is
astounding, and they then wonder why either the authors or their vendor is
a complete and utter moron.
But yes from an OOM perspective killing an unattached SHM segment makes
as much sense as killing anything else.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
to post comments)