> ok, this one got no objection except original patch author. > then, I'll push it to mainline. I'm glad that I who stabilization > developer have finished this work. > > If you think this patch is slightly large, please run, > % git diff a63d83f42^ mm/oom_kill.c > you'll understand this is minimal revert of unnecessary change. Andrew, please don't be lazy this one. I don't hope to slip this anymore. I was making the patch as you requested. but no responce. I who stabilization developr can't permit this userland breakage and sucky status. please join to fix it. Sadly, The delay will be increase, I have to switch full revert entirely instead your opinion. Spell out: I don't hope to continus this crazy discussion. a userland breakage bug is a bug, not anything else. I don't hope to talk this one anymore even though it's only 5 miniture. I don't think any rare usecase feature should die. but ZERO USER FEATURE SHOULDN'T BREAK USERLAND. -- 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>