[Sugar-devel] Killing activities when memory gets short
Jon Nettleton
jon.nettleton at gmail.com
Sun Aug 8 11:48:31 EDT 2010
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Martin Langhoff
<martin.langhoff at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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.
Has anyone looked into the Android Low Memory Killer kernel patch?
Google has already addressed this limitation with Android and done a
relatively good job at it. Their stuff is fit to run in 128MB of
memory which is much less than an XO has.
Jon
More information about the Devel
mailing list