> > The above story teach us oom-killer need some improvement. but it haven't > > prove your patches are correct solution. that's why you got to ask testing way. > > I would consider what I said above, "when faced with memory pressure from > an out of control or memory hogging task on the desktop, the oom killer > now kills it instead of a vital task such as an X server because of the > use of the task's rss instead of total_vm statistic" as an improvement > over killing X in those cases which it currently does. How do you > disagree? People observed simple s/total_vm/rss/ patch solve X issue. Then, other additional pieces need to explain why that's necessary and how to confirm it. In other word, I'm sure I'll continue to get OOM bug report in future. I'll need to decide revert or not revert each patches. no infomation is unwelcome. also, that's the reason why all of rewrite patch is wrong. if it will be merged, small bug report eventually is going to make all of revert. that doesn't fit our developerment process. -- 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>