From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail144.messagelabs.com (mail144.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2E4938D0017 for ; Sun, 14 Nov 2010 19:24:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from m4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.74]) by fgwmail5.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id oAF0OJxq032282 for (envelope-from kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com); Mon, 15 Nov 2010 09:24:19 +0900 Received: from smail (m4 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33FD545DE4D for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 09:24:19 +0900 (JST) Received: from s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.94]) by m4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E73845DE6E for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 09:24:19 +0900 (JST) Received: from s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC9391DB8041 for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 09:24:18 +0900 (JST) Received: from m106.s.css.fujitsu.com (m106.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.106]) by s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id A341C1DB803E for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2010 09:24:18 +0900 (JST) From: KOSAKI Motohiro Subject: Re: [resend][PATCH 2/4] Revert "oom: deprecate oom_adj tunable" In-Reply-To: <20101109122817.BC5A.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20101109105801.BC30.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <20101109122817.BC5A.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> Message-Id: <20101115092238.BEEE.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 09:24:17 +0900 (JST) Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: KOSAKI Motohiro Cc: David Rientjes , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , LKML , linux-mm List-ID: > > > Yes, I've tested it, and it deprecates the tunable as expected. A single > > > warning message serves the purpose well: let users know one time without > > > being overly verbose that the tunable is deprecated and give them > > > sufficient time (2 years) to start using the new tunable. That's how > > > deprecation is done. > > > > no sense. > > > > Why do their application need to rewrite for *YOU*? Okey, you will got > > benefit from your new knob. But NOBDOY use the new one. and People need > > to rewrite their application even though no benefit. > > > > Don't do selfish userland breakage! > > And you said you ignore bug even though you have seen it. It suck! At v2.6.36-rc1, oom-killer doesn't work at all because YOU BROKE. And I was working on fixing it. 2010-08-19 http://marc.info/?t=128223176900001&r=1&w=2 http://marc.info/?t=128221532700003&r=1&w=2 http://marc.info/?t=128221532500008&r=1&w=2 However, You submitted new crap before the fixing. 2010-08-15 http://marc.info/?t=128184669600001&r=1&w=2 If you tested mainline a bit, you could find the problem quickly. You should have fixed mainline kernel at first. Again, YOU HAVEN'T TESTED YOUR OWN PATCH AT ALL. -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org