[Sugar-devel] Killing activities when memory gets short

Martin Langhoff martin.langhoff at gmail.com
Sun Aug 8 11:42:37 EDT 2010

On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 9:33 AM, Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu at sugarlabs.org> wrote:
>> Can't we just _close it nicely_?
> When you are about to get into OOM?

Early on so we avoid OOM for most cases. Right now our OOM use cases
have nothing to do with misbehaved activities.

Once you're in "about to get into OOM", sugar-shell is unlikely to get
many cycles (and python is a bad lang to try handling this). If you
can seed the OOM scores of the process early on, you have a chance
that OOM will kill a reasonably "correct" one. (Not sure what the
state of play is with seeding the OOM scores from userland).

> point we should have given the activities and/or the user the option
> to avoid this situation.

I think it's the only thing we can reasonably do. And [if possible],
seed OOM scores.

When things get tight, only the kernel has a standing chance to run code.


 martin.langhoff at gmail.com
 martin at laptop.org -- School Server Architect
 - ask interesting questions
 - don't get distracted with shiny stuff  - working code first
 - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff

More information about the Devel mailing list