From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail202.messagelabs.com (mail202.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.227]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 716A06B02A3 for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 23:00:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from m5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.75]) by fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id o6930gBd011300 for (envelope-from kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com); Fri, 9 Jul 2010 12:00:43 +0900 Received: from smail (m5 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 854DE45DE57 for ; Fri, 9 Jul 2010 12:00:40 +0900 (JST) Received: from s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.95]) by m5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1845545DE53 for ; Fri, 9 Jul 2010 12:00:40 +0900 (JST) Received: from s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 004671DB8038 for ; Fri, 9 Jul 2010 12:00:39 +0900 (JST) Received: from ml14.s.css.fujitsu.com (ml14.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.104]) by s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id C26331DB805A for ; Fri, 9 Jul 2010 12:00:37 +0900 (JST) From: KOSAKI Motohiro Subject: Re: [patch 07/18] oom: filter tasks not sharing the same cpuset In-Reply-To: <20100702153508.fda82eb9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <20100613201257.6199.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <20100702153508.fda82eb9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Message-Id: <20100705110018.CC9F.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2010 12:00:36 +0900 (JST) Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Andrew Morton Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, David Rientjes , Rik van Riel , Nick Piggin , Oleg Nesterov , Balbir Singh , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: > > Unfortunatelly, I don't have enough time now. then, I expect my next review > > is not quite soon. but I'll promise I'll do. > > So where do we go from here? I have about 12,000 oom-killer related > emails saved up in my todo folder, ready for me to read next time I1 > have an oom-killer session. At least, all deadlock issue should be fixed. I don't know Michel's problem is still there. plus I think all desktop related issue also sould be fixed. but I'm not aggressive to include domain specific OOM tendency. It should be cared user-land callback and userland daemon. because any usecase specific change can be considered as regression from another usecase guys. About David's patch, I dunnno. he didn't explain his patch makes which change. If he will explained the worth and anybody agree it, it can be merged. but otherwise..... > What would happen if I just deleted them all? Probably, no problem. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org