From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail143.messagelabs.com (mail143.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85CEB8D0001 for ; Sat, 27 Nov 2010 20:42:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from wpaz1.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz1.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.65]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id oAS1g44Q010644 for ; Sat, 27 Nov 2010 17:42:04 -0800 Received: from pvg12 (pvg12.prod.google.com [10.241.210.140]) by wpaz1.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id oAS1g2Cx007325 for ; Sat, 27 Nov 2010 17:42:03 -0800 Received: by pvg12 with SMTP id 12so957106pvg.26 for ; Sat, 27 Nov 2010 17:42:02 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2010 17:41:58 -0800 (PST) From: David Rientjes Subject: Re: [resend][PATCH 2/4] Revert "oom: deprecate oom_adj tunable" In-Reply-To: <20101123160259.7B9C.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> Message-ID: References: <20101114135323.E00D.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <20101123160259.7B9C.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: KOSAKI Motohiro Cc: Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , LKML , linux-mm List-ID: On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > > > No irrelevant. Your patch break their environment even though > > > they don't use oom_adj explicitly. because their application are using it. > > > > > > > The _only_ difference too oom_adj since the rewrite is that it is now > > mapped on a linear scale rather than an exponential scale. > > _only_ mean don't ZERO different. Why do userland application need to rewrite? > Because NOTHING breaks with the new mapping. Eight months later since this was initially proposed on linux-mm, you still cannot show a single example that depended on the exponential mapping of oom_adj. I'm not going to continue responding to your criticism about this point since your argument is completely and utterly baseless. > Again, IF you need to [0 .. 1000] range, you can calculate it by your > application. current oom score can be get from /proc/pid/oom_score and > total memory can be get from /proc/meminfo. You shouldn't have break > anything. > That would require the userspace tunable to be adjusted anytime a task's mempolicy changes, its nodemask changes, it's cpuset attachment changes, its mems change, a memcg limit changes, etc. The only constant is the task's priority, and the current oom_score_adj implementation preserves that unless explicitly changed later by the user. I completely understand that you may not have a use for this. -- 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