From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail144.messagelabs.com (mail144.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A84526B01B0 for ; Fri, 4 Jun 2010 05:22:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from wpaz5.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz5.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.69]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id o549MqeJ032676 for ; Fri, 4 Jun 2010 02:22:52 -0700 Received: from pzk9 (pzk9.prod.google.com [10.243.19.137]) by wpaz5.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id o549MpqR008537 for ; Fri, 4 Jun 2010 02:22:51 -0700 Received: by pzk9 with SMTP id 9so628240pzk.18 for ; Fri, 04 Jun 2010 02:22:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2010 02:22:48 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rientjes Subject: Re: [patch -mm 08/18] oom: badness heuristic rewrite In-Reply-To: <20100604145723.e16d7fe0.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Message-ID: References: <20100601163627.245D.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <20100602225252.F536.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <20100603161030.074d9b98.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20100604085347.80c7b43f.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20100603170443.011fdf7c.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20100604092047.7b7d7bb1.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> <20100604145723.e16d7fe0.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Cc: Andrew Morton , KOSAKI Motohiro , Rik van Riel , Nick Piggin , Oleg Nesterov , Balbir Singh , linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Fri, 4 Jun 2010, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > > In my personal observation > > > > [1/18] for better behavior under cpuset. > > [2/18] for better behavior under cpuset. > > [3/18] for better behavior under mempolicy. > > [4/18] refactoring. > > [5/18] refactoring. > > [6/18] clean up. > > [7/18] changing the deault sysctl value. > > [8/18] completely new logic. > > [9/18] completely new logic. > > [10/18] a supplement for 8,9. > > [11/18] for better behavior under lowmem oom (disable oom kill) > > [12/18] clean up > > [13/18] bugfix for a possible race condition. (I'm not sure about details) > > [14/18] bugfix > > [15/18] bugfix > > [16/18] bugfix > > [17/18] bugfix > > [18/18] clean up. > > > > If distro admins are aggresive, them may backport 1,2,3,7,11 but > > it changes current logic. So, it's distro's decision. > > > > IMHO, without considering HUNKs, the patch order should be > > 13,14,15,16,17,1,2,3,7,11,4,5,6,18,12,8,9,10. > > bugfix -> patches for things making better -> refactoring -> the new implementation. > Thank you for very much for taking the time to look through each individual patch and suggest a different order. If the ordering of the patches will help move us forward, then I'd be extremely happy to do it :) > David, I have no objections to functions itself. But please start from small > good things. "Refactoring" is good but it tend to make backporting > not-straightforward. So, I think it should be done when there is no known issues. > I think you can do. > I'll reorganize the patchset itself without any implementation changes so it flows better and is more appropriately seperated as you suggest. I still believe there is no -rc material within this series (implying there is no -stable material either), but if you believe so then please reply to those patches with the new posting so Andrew can consider pushing it to Linus. Thanks Kame. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org