On Tue 02-06-15 00:27:44, Tetsuo Handa wrote: [...] > I've been asking for backportable workaround for many months. I spent time for > finding potential bugs ( http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=141684929114209 ). > If you are already aware that there are million+1 corner cases possible yet > (that is, we have too many potential bugs to identify and fix), why do you > keep refusing to offer for-now workaround (that is, paper over potential > bugs) ? I don't want to see customers and support staff suffering with OOM > corner cases any more... For-now workarounds tend to make the code even more complex and fragile. It is much more preferable to come up with a systematic solution rather than a pile of workarounds. Pushing workarounds just because they are easy to backport to distribution kernels is a wrong criteria. The current OOM killer code is far from ideal. Some of the heuristics might be suboptimal or even outright wrong. But piling more on them is not a way forward. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- 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>