Re: [to-be-updated] mm-memcg-add-memoryoom_control-notification-for-system-oom.patch removed from -mm tree
On Wed 20-11-13 00:05:18, David Rientjes wrote: > On Tue, 19 Nov 2013, a...@linux-foundation.org wrote: > > > Subject: [to-be-updated] > > mm-memcg-add-memoryoom_control-notification-for-system-oom.patch removed > > from -mm tree > > To: > > rient...@google.com,han...@cmpxchg.org,kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com,mho...@suse.cz,mm-comm...@vger.kernel.org > > From: a...@linux-foundation.org > > Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 13:38:14 -0800 > > > > > > The patch titled > > Subject: mm, memcg: add memory.oom_control notification for system oom > > has been removed from the -mm tree. Its filename was > > mm-memcg-add-memoryoom_control-notification-for-system-oom.patch > > > > This patch was dropped because an updated version will be merged > > Why is this removed? I've asked Andrew to drop it for now (you were CCed) and mentioned my reasons. > I've laid out my perspective for doing userspace oom handling and this is > a vital part for system oom handling. I know that we are currently > discussing alternative proposals but my proposal is by far the most > complete and allows the most powerful policies to be implemented in > userspace. I'd prefer if we would keep the patch unless an actual > alternative is proposed and agreed upon, we can still discuss alternatives > while this in -mm and this patch in no way precludes other mechanisms from > being implemented. > > So why remove this? This is a user interface visible change. I do not want to do it until we agree on a way to go. I do not see any advantage of having this in -mm until then. It doesn't need any testing from -next (does it?) and the code is simple enough to push it later on without troubles if the memcg.oom_control is considered as a way to go. I do not see any reason to rush it in now. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [to-be-updated] mm-memcg-add-memoryoom_control-notification-for-system-oom.patch removed from -mm tree
On Tue, 19 Nov 2013, a...@linux-foundation.org wrote: > Subject: [to-be-updated] > mm-memcg-add-memoryoom_control-notification-for-system-oom.patch removed from > -mm tree > To: > rient...@google.com,han...@cmpxchg.org,kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com,mho...@suse.cz,mm-comm...@vger.kernel.org > From: a...@linux-foundation.org > Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 13:38:14 -0800 > > > The patch titled > Subject: mm, memcg: add memory.oom_control notification for system oom > has been removed from the -mm tree. Its filename was > mm-memcg-add-memoryoom_control-notification-for-system-oom.patch > > This patch was dropped because an updated version will be merged Why is this removed? I've laid out my perspective for doing userspace oom handling and this is a vital part for system oom handling. I know that we are currently discussing alternative proposals but my proposal is by far the most complete and allows the most powerful policies to be implemented in userspace. I'd prefer if we would keep the patch unless an actual alternative is proposed and agreed upon, we can still discuss alternatives while this in -mm and this patch in no way precludes other mechanisms from being implemented. So why remove this? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [to-be-updated] mm-memcg-add-memoryoom_control-notification-for-system-oom.patch removed from -mm tree
On Tue, 19 Nov 2013, a...@linux-foundation.org wrote: Subject: [to-be-updated] mm-memcg-add-memoryoom_control-notification-for-system-oom.patch removed from -mm tree To: rient...@google.com,han...@cmpxchg.org,kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com,mho...@suse.cz,mm-comm...@vger.kernel.org From: a...@linux-foundation.org Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 13:38:14 -0800 The patch titled Subject: mm, memcg: add memory.oom_control notification for system oom has been removed from the -mm tree. Its filename was mm-memcg-add-memoryoom_control-notification-for-system-oom.patch This patch was dropped because an updated version will be merged Why is this removed? I've laid out my perspective for doing userspace oom handling and this is a vital part for system oom handling. I know that we are currently discussing alternative proposals but my proposal is by far the most complete and allows the most powerful policies to be implemented in userspace. I'd prefer if we would keep the patch unless an actual alternative is proposed and agreed upon, we can still discuss alternatives while this in -mm and this patch in no way precludes other mechanisms from being implemented. So why remove this? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [to-be-updated] mm-memcg-add-memoryoom_control-notification-for-system-oom.patch removed from -mm tree
On Wed 20-11-13 00:05:18, David Rientjes wrote: On Tue, 19 Nov 2013, a...@linux-foundation.org wrote: Subject: [to-be-updated] mm-memcg-add-memoryoom_control-notification-for-system-oom.patch removed from -mm tree To: rient...@google.com,han...@cmpxchg.org,kamezawa.hir...@jp.fujitsu.com,mho...@suse.cz,mm-comm...@vger.kernel.org From: a...@linux-foundation.org Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 13:38:14 -0800 The patch titled Subject: mm, memcg: add memory.oom_control notification for system oom has been removed from the -mm tree. Its filename was mm-memcg-add-memoryoom_control-notification-for-system-oom.patch This patch was dropped because an updated version will be merged Why is this removed? I've asked Andrew to drop it for now (you were CCed) and mentioned my reasons. I've laid out my perspective for doing userspace oom handling and this is a vital part for system oom handling. I know that we are currently discussing alternative proposals but my proposal is by far the most complete and allows the most powerful policies to be implemented in userspace. I'd prefer if we would keep the patch unless an actual alternative is proposed and agreed upon, we can still discuss alternatives while this in -mm and this patch in no way precludes other mechanisms from being implemented. So why remove this? This is a user interface visible change. I do not want to do it until we agree on a way to go. I do not see any advantage of having this in -mm until then. It doesn't need any testing from -next (does it?) and the code is simple enough to push it later on without troubles if the memcg.oom_control is considered as a way to go. I do not see any reason to rush it in now. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
