(5/8/12 2:58 AM), Anton Vorontsov wrote:
On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 01:42:05AM -0400, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
[...]
Well, yeah, if we are to report _number of pages_, the numbers better
be meaningful.
That said, I think you are being unfair to Anton who's one of the few
that's actually taking the time to implement this properly instead of
settling for an out-of-tree hack.
Unfair? But only I can talk about technical comment. To be honest, I
really dislike
I need say the same explanation again and again. A lot of people don't read
past discussion. And as far as the patches take the same mistake, I must say
the same thing. It is just PITA.
Note that just telling people that something is PITA doesn't help solve
things (so people will come back to you with stupid questions over and
over again). You can call people morons, idiots and dumbasses (that's
all fine) but still finding a way to be productive. :-)
You could just give a link to a previous discussion, in which you think
you explained all your concerns regarding cache handling issues, or
memory notifications/statistics in general.
So, feel free to call me an idiot, but please expand your points a
little bit or give a link to the discussion you're referring to?
I don't think you are idiot. But I hope you test your patch before submitting.
That just don't work especially on x86. Because of, all x86 box have multiple zone
and summarized statistics (i.e. global_page_state() thing) don't work and can't
prevent oom nor swapping.
and please see may previous mail.
--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>