On Thu, 4 Feb 2016, Michal Hocko wrote: > > I think it would be helpful to show anon-rss after reaping, however, so we > > can compare to the previous anon-rss that was reported. And, I agree that > > leaving behind a message in the kernel log that reaping has been > > successful is worthwhile. So this line should just show what anon-rss is > > after reaping and make it clear that this is not the memory reaped. > > Does > "oom_reaper: reaped process %d (%s) current memory anon-rss:%lukB, file-rss:%lukB, shmem-rss:%lukB " > > sound any better? oom_reaper: reaped process %d (%s), now anon-rss:%lukB would probably be better until additional support is added to do other kinds of reaping other than just primarily heap. This should help to quantify the exact amount of memory that could be reaped (or otherwise unmapped) iff oom_reaper has to get involved rather than fluctations that have nothing to do with it. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>