All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: "Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lclaudio@uudg.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/10] oom: filter tasks not sharing the same cpuset
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 12:05:01 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1006081201530.18848@chino.kir.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100608210148.7695.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>

On Tue, 8 Jun 2010, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:

> From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
> 
> Tasks that do not share the same set of allowed nodes with the task that
> triggered the oom should not be considered as candidates for oom kill.
> 

You're not a maintainer, as I obviously have to point out to you often 
enough.  I've repeatedly asked you to work with me in reviewing my oom 
killer rewrite on linux-mm, yet you seldom offer any valuable feedback 
other than a simple "nack".  I don't consider any of your patchset here to 
be more applicable than my patchset, which has been developed over the 
course of several months, and your lack of participation in the process is 
really quite shocking to me.

In case nobody has told you before: Andrew maintains this code and these 
patches will be going through the -mm tree.  You are not a maintainer of 
it (or any other kernel code), so please act within your role of kernel 
hacker and review patches as people propose them by offering your 
constructive feedback.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: "Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lclaudio@uudg.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/10] oom: filter tasks not sharing the same cpuset
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 12:05:01 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1006081201530.18848@chino.kir.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100608210148.7695.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>

On Tue, 8 Jun 2010, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:

> From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
> 
> Tasks that do not share the same set of allowed nodes with the task that
> triggered the oom should not be considered as candidates for oom kill.
> 

You're not a maintainer, as I obviously have to point out to you often 
enough.  I've repeatedly asked you to work with me in reviewing my oom 
killer rewrite on linux-mm, yet you seldom offer any valuable feedback 
other than a simple "nack".  I don't consider any of your patchset here to 
be more applicable than my patchset, which has been developed over the 
course of several months, and your lack of participation in the process is 
really quite shocking to me.

In case nobody has told you before: Andrew maintains this code and these 
patches will be going through the -mm tree.  You are not a maintainer of 
it (or any other kernel code), so please act within your role of kernel 
hacker and review patches as people propose them by offering your 
constructive feedback.

--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2010-06-08 19:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-06-08 11:53 [0/10] 3rd pile of OOM patch series KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:53 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:54 ` [PATCH 01/10] oom: don't try to kill oom_unkillable child KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:54   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 19:10   ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 19:10     ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 11:55 ` [PATCH 02/10] oom: remove verbose argument from __oom_kill_process() KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:55   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 19:09   ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 19:09     ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 11:56 ` [PATCH 03/10] oom: rename badness() to oom_badness() KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:56   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 19:09   ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 19:09     ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 11:57 ` [PATCH 04/10] oom: move sysctl declarations to oom.h KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:57   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:58 ` [PATCH 05/10] oom: enable oom tasklist dump by default KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:58   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:59 ` [PATCH 06/10] oom: cleanup has_intersects_mems_allowed() KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:59   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 19:07   ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 19:07     ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 11:59 ` [PATCH 07/10] oom: kill useless debug print KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 11:59   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 19:01   ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 19:01     ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 12:01 ` [PATCH 08/10] oom: use send_sig() instead force_sig() KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 12:01   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 18:41   ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-08 18:41     ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-10  0:59     ` [PATCH 0/1] signals: introduce send_sigkill() helper Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-10  0:59       ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-10  1:00       ` [PATCH 1/1] " Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-10  1:00         ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-11  0:40         ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-06-11  0:40           ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-06-13 11:24         ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-13 11:24           ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-13 15:29         ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-13 15:29           ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-06-16 10:00           ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-16 10:00             ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-13 11:24     ` [PATCH 08/10] oom: use send_sig() instead force_sig() KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-13 11:24       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 12:02 ` [PATCH 09/10] oom: filter tasks not sharing the same cpuset KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 12:02   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 19:05   ` David Rientjes [this message]
2010-06-08 19:05     ` David Rientjes
2010-06-08 12:04 ` [PATCH 10/10] oom: select task from tasklist for mempolicy ooms KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-06-08 12:04   ` KOSAKI Motohiro

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=alpine.DEB.2.00.1006081201530.18848@chino.kir.corp.google.com \
    --to=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=lclaudio@uudg.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
    --cc=npiggin@suse.de \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.