Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 00:42:47 -0800 From: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Cc: David Schultz <das@FreeBSD.ORG>, Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu>, Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com>, Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com>, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Patch to protect process from pageout killing Message-ID: <20030325084247.GA17195@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> In-Reply-To: <14382.1048580753@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <20030325075342.GA5450@HAL9000.homeunix.com> <14382.1048580753@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Mar 25, 2003 at 09:25:53AM +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > 3. A mechanism to influence the "Who do we kill ?" decision once > things have gone from bad to worse. > > To tackle them from behind: > > Wes has a proposal for #3 which is a per-process flag which says > "I'm sacred". I think that is a sound principle since that is > usually exactly what people want: Do Not Kill This Process. > > Certain processes already enjoy special protection, pid==1 most > notably, this would just be a way to make the same protection > available to other processes. I'm not happy about using the > resourcelimit code for booleans, and I don't think the flag > should be inherited, but otherwise I'm for the idea. JFYI: On ia64 there are 12 bits in the ELF header reserved for OS specific flags. A very natural way to flag a process as being sacred is by flagging the ELF executable. You could use brandelf for that. -- Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel@xcllnt.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030325084247.GA17195>