I see, then let's do this as you said. On 2023/4/6 16:30, Michal Hocko wrote:
As I've said, I do not see any major concern having this behavior implicit, the behavior makes semantic sense and it is also much more likely that the selected oom victim will be a better choice than what we do currently. Especially on properly partitioned systems with large memory consumers in each partition (cpuset). That being said, I would just not add any sysctl at this stage and rather document the decision. If we ever encounter usecase(s) which would regress based on this change we can introcuce the sysctl later.
