Re: [patch 1/2] mm, memcg: avoid oom notification when current needs access to memory reserves
From: Andrew Morton <hidden>
Date: 2014-01-09 22:48:04
Also in:
linux-mm, lkml
From: Andrew Morton <hidden>
Date: 2014-01-09 22:48:04
Also in:
linux-mm, lkml
On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 13:34:24 -0800 (PST) David Rientjes [off-list ref] wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jan 2014, Andrew Morton wrote:quoted
I just spent a happy half hour reliving this thread and ended up deciding I agreed with everyone! I appears that many more emails are needed so I think I'll drop http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/mm-memcg-avoid-oom-notification-when-current-needs-access-to-memory-reserves.patch for now. The claim that mm-memcg-avoid-oom-notification-when-current-needs-access-to-memory-reserves.patch will impact existing userspace seems a bit dubious to me.I'm not sure why this was dropped since it's vitally needed for any sane userspace oom handler to be effective.
It was dropped because the other memcg developers disagreed with it. I'd really prefer not to have to spend a great amount of time parsing argumentative and repetitive emails to make a tie-break decision which may well be wrong anyway. Please work with the other guys to find an acceptable implementation. There must be *something* we can do?