From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Paul Menage <menage@google.com>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
mel@csn.ul.ie, npiggin@suse.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] copy over oom_adj value at fork time
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 16:19:30 +0900 (JST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090721161319.2ABD.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6599ad830907201452h5b57a444mf4be96e194cb737@mail.gmail.com>
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 4:12 PM, David Rientjes<rientjes@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > My patches don't merely address threads that have an oom_adj value of
> > OOM_DISABLE while others sharing the same memory do not, they address a
> > consistency issue whereas those threads may all share memory but have
> > radically different oom_adj values: that means that only the highest
> > oom_adj value amongst them is actually used by the oom killer and all
> > other oom_adj values set by the user for those threads are wrong.
>
> But these patches change an API that has existed for at least 4 years
> (i.e. before git history exists) and the change is known to break some
> apps that relied on the existing API. Should there be more
> justification than to fix an inconsistency that only you seem to be
> claiming is a problem? (Yes, I know it also fixes the OOM killer
> livelock, but that could be done without breaking the API).
Paul, I'd like to clarily this duscussion. Doesn't Rik's patch fix your vfork issue or
you worry about generic ABI breaking issue?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-07-21 7:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <200906020557.n525v6KO004302@imap1.linux-foundation.org>
2009-07-15 0:52 ` + oom-move-oom_adj-value-from-task_struct-to-mm_struct.patch added to -mm tree Paul Menage
2009-07-15 1:05 ` [PATCH] copy over oom_adj value at fork time Rik van Riel
2009-07-15 1:15 ` Paul Menage
2009-07-15 2:01 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-15 2:12 ` [PATCH -mm] copy over oom_adj value at fork time (v2) Rik van Riel
2009-07-15 3:42 ` David Rientjes
2009-07-15 3:48 ` [PATCH] copy over oom_adj value at fork time David Rientjes
2009-07-16 23:29 ` Paul Menage
2009-07-17 9:34 ` David Rientjes
2009-07-17 20:03 ` Paul Menage
2009-07-17 23:12 ` David Rientjes
2009-07-20 21:52 ` Paul Menage
2009-07-21 3:40 ` David Rientjes
2009-07-21 7:19 ` KOSAKI Motohiro [this message]
2009-07-21 16:06 ` Paul Menage
2009-07-21 19:54 ` David Rientjes
2009-07-21 19:57 ` Paul Menage
2009-07-21 20:00 ` David Rientjes
2009-07-21 20:03 ` Paul Menage
2009-07-23 23:21 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-23 23:29 ` David Rientjes
2009-07-24 1:10 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-24 9:27 ` David Rientjes
2009-07-28 6:09 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-07-28 6:14 ` David Rientjes
2009-07-15 1:49 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090721161319.2ABD.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=menage@google.com \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome