On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:23:39 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 13:15:52 +0900 > Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 16:59:21 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > These are dump of patches just for showing concept, what I want to do. > > > But not tested. please see if you have free time. (you can ignore ;) > > > > > > Anyway, this will HUNK to the latest mmotm, Kirill's work is merged. > > > > > > This is not related to David's work. I don't hesitate to rebase mine > > > to the mmotm if his one is merged, it's easy. > > > But I'm not sure his one goes to mm soon. > > > > > > 1st patch is for better handling oom-kill under memcg. > > It's bigger than I expected, but it basically looks good to me. > > > > BTW, do you think we need quick fix ? I can't think of a very easy/small fix > which is very correct... To be honest, yes. IMHO, casing global oom because of memcg's oom is a very bad behavior in the sence of resource isolation. But I agree it's hard to fix in simple way, so leave it as it is for now.. hmm.. I must admit that I've not done enough oom test under very high pressure. Thanks, Daisuke Nishimura. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>