Re: [PATCH][mmotm-2010-02-01-16-25] Fix wrong accouting of anon and file

[David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>]

On Thu, 4 Feb 2010, Minchan Kim wrote:

> Unfortunately, Kame said he doesn't support this series.
> I am not sure we need this patch or revert patch.
> 

Nobody is currently using it and it adds an overhead just by doing the 
extra branches, so I'd be inclined to drop mm-count-lowmem-rss.patch from 
-mm and then reintroduce it later if something needs it down the line.

> Who need this?
> 
> David. Do you want to remain this patch in mmotm for your OOM patch 
> in future?
> 

We'll need to do something for lowmem ooms so that we aren't needlessly 
killing taks that don't consume it.  At this point, I think it's better to 
just fail GFP_DMA allocations where direct reclaim (and, later, memory 
compaction) has failed unless it is __GFP_NOFAIL, which none of them are.  
So this would be a change to the page allocator to defer the oom killer 
and return NULL on GFP_DMA instead of needlessly killing tasks.

> If anyone doesn't reply my question, Do we have to make revert patch?
> 

We won't need a revert patch, Andrew will be able to simply drop 
mm-count-lowmem-rss.patch from -mm.

--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>