On Fri, 22 Oct 2010 08:26:08 -0500 "Steven J. Magnani" <steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 12:20 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > > BTW, have you tried oom_notifier+NOMMU memory limit oom-killer ? > > It may be a chance to implement a custom OOM-Killer in userland on > > EMBEDED systems. > > No - for what I need (simple sandboxing) just running my 'problem' > process in a memory cgroup is sufficient. I might even be able to get > away with oom_kill_allocating_task and no cgroup, but since that would > allow dosfsck to run the system completely out of memory there's no > guarantee that it would be the one that pushes the system over the edge. > > What do you mean by "NOMMU memory limit"? (Is there some other way to > achieve the same functionality?) > I just meant memory cgroup for NOMMU. > I looked into David's initial suggestion of using ulimit to create a > sandbox but it seems that nommu.c doesn't respect RLIMIT_AS. When I can > find some time I'll try to cook up a patch for that. Hmm. I think fixing RLIMIT_AS is better. (but no nack to this patch.) Using memcg for _a_ program sounds like overkill... Thanks, -Kame -- 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>