Re: oom killer and its superior braindamage in 2.4

[Marc-Christian Petersen <m.c.p@wolk-project.de>]

On Sunday 23 February 2003 21:18, Rik van Riel wrote:

Hi Rik,

> It'd be interesting to know where these processes are spending
> their CPU time and why they're not catching their signals.
I'll look into it again when I do the next run.

> > Sysrq-i gave me the chance to get out of the OOM killing process and
> > only kernel threads were left + getty's so I was able to log in again.
> Strange, so sysrq-i manages to kill the processes, but the OOM
> killer doesn't kill the processes ?
yep, so it is.

> This is very suspect because the OOM killer uses force_sig in
> the same way the sysrq-i handler does...
indeed. Well, sysrq-i need about 5 seconds to give me my getty back.

Anyway, your patch should go into -BK. Your patch does _not_ introduce this 
behaviour, it's present even w/o your patch but your approach makes things 
better :)

ciao, Marc