On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > "By hand" includes "automatically with daemon program", of course. > > Hmm, in short, your opinion is "killing current is good for now" ? > > I have no strong opinion, here. (Because I'll recommend all customers to > disable oom kill if they don't want any task to be killed automatically.) > I think there're a couple of options: either define threshold notifiers with memory.usage_in_bytes so userspace can proactively address low memory situations prior to oom, or use the oom notifier after setting echo 1 > /dev/cgroup/blah/memory.oom_control to address those issues in userspace as they happen. If userspace wants to defer back to the kernel oom killer because it can't raise max_usage_in_bytes, then echo 0 > /dev/cgroup/blah/memory.oom_control should take care of it instantly and I'd rather see a misconfigured memcg with tasks that are OOM_DISABLE but not memcg->oom_kill_disable to be starved of memory than panicking the entire system. Those are good options for users having to deal with low memory situations, thanks for continuing to work on it! -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>