Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2017 12:16:58 +0200 From: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> To: Johannes Lundberg <johalun0@gmail.com> Cc: Larry McVoy <lm@mcvoy.com>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: OOM problem? Message-ID: <20171208101658.GD2272@kib.kiev.ua> In-Reply-To: <CAECmPwtcsHwiZpmx4%2BT_w3njEdUAjGZiRZKEX53m-QVJLSuY9Q@mail.gmail.com> References: <20171208011430.GA16016@mcvoy.com> <CAECmPwtcsHwiZpmx4%2BT_w3njEdUAjGZiRZKEX53m-QVJLSuY9Q@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 08:18:21AM +0000, Johannes Lundberg wrote: > Regarding potential oom overhaul. Personally I like the idea of an oom > signal. The idea comes from iOS where applications get a callback when > system memory is low and they're given a chance to free unused > resources or resources that can easily be recreated, before getting > killed completely. The OOM signal is a topic which was discussed to death many times before. The summary is that it does not work, because you need to provide pages for userspace to be able to handle the signal.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20171208101658.GD2272>