On Fri, 22 Jun 2012, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > >> No worth to make fragile ABI. Do you have any benefit? > >> > > > > Yes, because this is exactly where we would discover something like a > > mm->nr_ptes accounting issue since it would result in an oom kill and we'd > > notice the mismatch between nr_ptes and rss in the tasklist dump. > > Below patch is better, then. tasklist dump should show brief summary and > final killed process output should show most detail info. And, now all of > get_mm_rss() callsite got consistent. > No, it's not. Your patch is factoring ptes into get_mm_rss() throughout the kernel, my patch is showing get_mm_rss() and nr_ptes in the oom killer tasklist dump since they are both (currently) factored in seperately. They are two functionally different changes. If you want to factor ptes into get_mm_rss() and make that change throughout the kernel, then you should patch linux-next which includes my oom patch, write an actual changelog for why ptes should now be included in get_mm_rss() -- which I'll nack because it significantly changes /proc/pid/stat output for applications between kernel versions that we depend very heavily on -- and propose it seperately. Thanks. -- 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>