Patch to protect process from pageout killing

[Wes Peters]

On Tuesday 25 March 2003 08:34, John Baldwin wrote:
> On 25-Mar-2003 Wes Peters wrote:
> > On Monday 24 March 2003 08:36, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> >> Also, doesn't this result in the flag being inerited with fork() and
> >> thereby negating the effect you are seeking for squid ?
> >
> > I looked through all the places in kern_fork.c where p2->p_flag gets
> > set and didn't see anything that looked like it would inherit
> > P_PROTECTED from p1->p_flag.  Did I miss something?  I'm obviously a
> > bit of a neophyte in this part of the kernel.
>
> rlimit's are inherited.  However, due to a "feature" bug in your patch,
> the P_PROTECTED flag doesn't get turned on when the rlimit is inherited
> in fork1().

feature bug?  If you mean the fact that the setting for P_PROTECTED isn't 
stored in the rlimit, that was intentional.  rlimits are inherited and I 
specifically didn't want that behavior, similar to p_cpulimit.  I still 
agree resource limits are not an ideal interface to use for this, I'll 
look further.

-- 

        Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?

Wes Peters                                               wes at softweyr.com