Re: [patch 1/2] mm, memcg: avoid oom notification when current needsaccess to memory reserves

[Johannes Weiner]

On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 06:52:10PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Nov 2013, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> 
> > The long-standing, user-visible definition of the current line agrees
> > with me.  You can't just redefine this, period.
> > 
> > I tried to explain to you how insane the motivation for this patch is,
> > but it does not look like you are reading what I write.  But you don't
> > get to change user-visible behavior just like that anyway, much less
> > so without a sane reason, so this was a complete waste of time :-(
> > 
> 
> If you would like to leave this to Andrew's decision, that's fine.  
> Michal has already agreed with my patch and has acked it in -mm.
> 
> If userspace is going to handle oom conditions, which is possible today 
> and will be extended in the future, then it should only wakeup as a last 
> resort when there is no possibility of future memory freeing.

I'll ack a patch that accomplishes that.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/