[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20100113145403.e44a5490.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 14:54:03 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Xiaotian Feng <dfeng@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Michal Schmidt <mschmidt@...hat.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Serge Hallyn <serue@...ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
Frans Pop <elendil@...net.nl>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] accouting: account if a task was killed by OOM
killer
On Mon, 11 Jan 2010 14:40:34 +0800
Xiaotian Feng <dfeng@...hat.com> wrote:
> This patch introduces a new accounting flag which is set when a task
> was killed by OOM killer. taskstats can tell users when a job has been
> killed by the oomkiller.
>
Why is this useful? I'd be looking for a description of some
operational scenario where this feature is valuable to an operator?
The description is incomplete. The patch also alters the contents of
the BSD accounting records. That's a change to an ancient interface
and needs a bit of exposure and thought. Is it good to put such a
highly linux-specific and somewhat linux-version-specific field into
such a venerable userspace interface?
If we _do_ decide to change the BSD accounting records in this manner
then presumably a manpage will need to be updated. A cc to
linux-api@...r.kernel.org would be appropriate.
But I'm not very convinced about this whole idea at present, personally.
> include/linux/acct.h | 1 +
> include/linux/taskstats.h | 2 +-
> kernel/acct.c | 2 ++
> kernel/tsacct.c | 2 ++
I'm a bit surprised that getdelays.c doesn't print ac_flag.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists