On Mon 26-10-15 13:40:49, Aristeu Rozanski wrote: > Hi Michal, > On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 06:20:12PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: [...] > > Would it make more sense to distinguish different parts of the OOM > > report by loglevel properly? > > pr_err - killed task report > > pr_warning - oom invocation + memory info > > pr_notice - task list > > pr_info - stack trace > > That'd work, yes, but I'd think the stack trace would be pr_debug. At a > point that you suspect the OOM killer isn't doing the right thing picking > up tasks and you need more information. Stack trace should be independent on the oom victim selection because the selection should be as much deterministic as possible - so it should only depend on the memory consumption. I do agree that the exact trace is not very useful for the (maybe) majority of OOM reports. I am trying to remember when it was really useful the last time and have trouble to find an example. So I would tend to agree that pr_debug would me more suitable. -- 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>