From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030739AbXCMPlQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 11:41:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030745AbXCMPlP (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 11:41:15 -0400 Received: from mailhub.sw.ru ([195.214.233.200]:7151 "EHLO relay.sw.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030739AbXCMPlP (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2007 11:41:15 -0400 Message-ID: <45F6C93F.3080207@sw.ru> Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 18:54:39 +0300 From: Kirill Korotaev User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.13) Gecko/20060417 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, ru MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Herbert Poetzl CC: Pavel Emelianov , Andrew Morton , containers@lists.osdl.org, menage@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/7] RSS controller core References: <45ED7DEC.7010403@sw.ru> <45ED80E1.7030406@sw.ru> <20070306140036.4e85bd2f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <45F3F581.9030503@sw.ru> <20070311045111.62d3e9f9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070312010039.GC21861@MAIL.13thfloor.at> <45F51709.1010409@sw.ru> <20070312211111.GB21258@MAIL.13thfloor.at> <45F6BEFF.5000109@sw.ru> <20070313151154.GI8755@MAIL.13thfloor.at> In-Reply-To: <20070313151154.GI8755@MAIL.13thfloor.at> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Herbert, >>Just curious why current vserver code kills arbitrary >>task in container then? > > > because it obviously lacks the finess of OpenVZ code :) > > seriously, handling the OOM kills inside a container > has never been a real world issue, as once you are > really out of memory (and OOM starts killing) you > usually have lost the game anyways (i.e. a guest restart > or similar is required to get your services up and > running again) and OOM killer decisions are not perfect > in mainline either, but, you've probably seen the > FIXME and TODO entries in the code showing that this > is work in progress ... I'm talking not about the finess of the code, but rather about the lack of isolation, i.e. one VE can affect others. Kirill