| To: | David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: deep chmod|chown -R begin to start OOMkiller |
| From: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 13 Dec 2005 02:58:29 +0100 |
| Cc: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20051213013204.GW501696@melbourne.sgi.com> |
| References: | <20051207183531.5c13e8c5.masaki-c@nict.go.jp> <20051208070841.GJ501696@melbourne.sgi.com> <20051209104148.346f2ff5.masaki-c@nict.go.jp> <20051212014633.GC19154461@melbourne.sgi.com> <p73bqzmpx2f.fsf@verdi.suse.de> <20051213013204.GW501696@melbourne.sgi.com> |
| Sender: | linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
> Well, if you can define "available memory" in any sane way in > the context we are operating in then that would work. Just total memory. XFS uses that already for some things. Not 100% bullet proof, but a reasonable approximation -Andi |
| Previous by Date: | Re: deep chmod|chown -R begin to start OOMkiller, David Chinner |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: deep chmod|chown -R begin to start OOMkiller, David Chinner |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: deep chmod|chown -R begin to start OOMkiller, David Chinner |
| Next by Thread: | Re: deep chmod|chown -R begin to start OOMkiller, David Chinner |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |