On Wed, 21 Apr 2010, Andrew Morton wrote: > fyi, I still consider these patches to be in the "stuck" state. So we > need to get them unstuck. > > > Hiroyuki (and anyone else): could you please summarise in the briefest > way possible what your objections are to Daivd's oom-killer changes? > > I'll start: we don't change the kernel ABI. Ever. And when we _do_ > change it we don't change it without warning. > I'm not going to allow a simple cleanup to jeopardize the entire patchset, so I can write a patch that readds /proc/sys/vm/oom_kill_allocating_task that simply mirrors the setting of /proc/sys/vm/oom_kill_quick and then warn about its deprecation. I don't believe we need to do the same thing for the removal of /proc/sys/vm/oom_dump_tasks since that functionality is now enabled by default. -- 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>