On Tue 02-06-15 00:27:44, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
[...]

I've been asking for backportable workaround for many months. I spent time for
finding potential bugs ( http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=141684929114209 ).
If you are already aware that there are million+1 corner cases possible yet
(that is, we have too many potential bugs to identify and fix), why do you
keep refusing to offer for-now workaround (that is, paper over potential
bugs) ? I don't want to see customers and support staff suffering with OOM
corner cases any more...

For-now workarounds tend to make the code even more complex and
fragile. It is much more preferable to come up with a systematic solution
rather than a pile of workarounds. Pushing workarounds just because they
are easy to backport to distribution kernels is a wrong criteria.

The current OOM killer code is far from ideal. Some of the heuristics
might be suboptimal or even outright wrong. But piling more on them is
not a way forward.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

--
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>