> >> I'm looking for a way to keep track of the processes that fail to
> >> allocate new
> >> virtual memory. What do you think about the following approach
> >> (untested)?
> > Looks like an easy way for users to spam syslogd over and
> > over and over again.
> > At the very least, shouldn't this
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> + printk(KERN_INFO
> + "out of virtual memory for process %d (%s): total_vm=%lu,
> uid=%d\n",
> + current->pid, current->comm, total_vm, current->uid);
And align this one with the print_fatal layout:
printk(KERN_
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>printk("%s/%d: potentially unexpected fatal signal %d.\n",
>current->comm, current->pid, signr);
can we have both KERN_WARNING please?
Gruss
Bernd
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the bo
Andrea Righi wrote:
> Robin Holt wrote:
>> On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 09:50:03AM +0200, Andrea Righi wrote:
>>> Rik van Riel wrote:
Andrea Righi wrote:
> I'm looking for a way to keep track of the processes that fail to
> allocate new
> virtual memory. What do you think about the foll
Robin Holt wrote:
> On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 09:50:03AM +0200, Andrea Righi wrote:
>> Rik van Riel wrote:
>>> Andrea Righi wrote:
I'm looking for a way to keep track of the processes that fail to
allocate new
virtual memory. What do you think about the following approach
(unteste
On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 09:50:03AM +0200, Andrea Righi wrote:
> Rik van Riel wrote:
> > Andrea Righi wrote:
> >> I'm looking for a way to keep track of the processes that fail to
> >> allocate new
> >> virtual memory. What do you think about the following approach
> >> (untested)?
> >
> > Looks lik
Rik van Riel wrote:
> Andrea Righi wrote:
>> I'm looking for a way to keep track of the processes that fail to
>> allocate new
>> virtual memory. What do you think about the following approach
>> (untested)?
>
> Looks like an easy way for users to spam syslogd over and
> over and over again.
>
> At
Andrea Righi wrote:
I'm looking for a way to keep track of the processes that fail to allocate new
virtual memory. What do you think about the following approach (untested)?
Looks like an easy way for users to spam syslogd over and
over and over again.
At the very least, shouldn't this be depe
8 matches
Mail list logo