Re: Avoiding OOM on overcommit...?

From: Jamie Lokier (lk@tantalophile.demon.co.uk)
Date: Fri Mar 24 2000 - 19:52:16 EST

Next message: Jamie Lokier: "Re: [PATCH] Generic detection of ISA PnP modems (new)"

Previous message: Ragnar Kjørstad: "Re: Endless overcommit memory thread."
In reply to: Alan Cox: "Re: Avoiding OOM on overcommit...?"
Next in thread: David Schwartz: "RE: Avoiding OOM on overcommit...?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Alan Cox wrote:
> > The process isn't just killed. It dumps core (the default behavior of
> > receiving SIGSEGV according to signal(7)). Which is icing on the cake
> > here.
>
> Not always. If there is no memory to grow the stack the signal cannot be
> delivered and it gets SIGKILL

Sounds like a deficiency. Not the SIGKILL -- that's fine. But it
should still try to dump core. That might work, if you ran out of stack
due to a user resource limit because the limit doesn't prevent the core
dump from working.

-- Jamie

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Jamie Lokier: "Re: [PATCH] Generic detection of ISA PnP modems (new)"
Previous message: Ragnar Kjørstad: "Re: Endless overcommit memory thread."
In reply to: Alan Cox: "Re: Avoiding OOM on overcommit...?"
Next in thread: David Schwartz: "RE: Avoiding OOM on overcommit...?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 24 2000 - 21:21:39 EST