Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 9 Jan 2014 14:47:57 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [patch 1/2] mm, memcg: avoid oom notification when current needs access to memory reserves |
| |
On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 13:34:24 -0800 (PST) David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Jan 2014, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > 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?
| |