From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752494Ab0BPGBj (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Feb 2010 01:01:39 -0500 Received: from fgwmail7.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.37]:51284 "EHLO fgwmail7.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751811Ab0BPGBi (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Feb 2010 01:01:38 -0500 X-SecurityPolicyCheck-FJ: OK by FujitsuOutboundMailChecker v1.3.1 From: KOSAKI Motohiro To: KOSAKI Motohiro Subject: Re: [patch 1/7 -mm] oom: filter tasks not sharing the same cpuset Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, David Rientjes , Andrew Morton , Rik van Riel , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki , Nick Piggin , Andrea Arcangeli , Balbir Singh , Lubos Lunak , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org In-Reply-To: <20100216110859.72C6.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20100216110859.72C6.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> Message-Id: <20100216150100.72F7.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Becky! ver. 2.50.07 [ja] Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 15:01:33 +0900 (JST) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org typo. > But this explanation is irrelevant and meaningless. CPUSET can change s/CPUSET/mempolicy/ > restricted node dynamically. So, the tsk->mempolicy at oom time doesn't > represent the place of task's usage memory. plus, OOM_DISABLE can > always makes undesirable result. it's not special in this case. > > The fact is, both current and your heuristics have a corner case. it's > obvious. (I haven't seen corner caseless heuristics). then talking your > patch's merit doesn't help to merge the patch. The most important thing > is, we keep no regression. personally, I incline your one. but It doesn't > mean we can ignore its demerit. > > >