[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20111213145851.c7e5d8fa.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:58:51 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com" <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
rientjes@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] oom: add trace points for debugging.
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 18:12:25 +0900
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> Changelog:
> - devided into oom tracepoint and task tracepoint.
> - task tracepoint traces fork/rename
> - oom tracepoint traces modification to oom_score_adj.
>
> dropped acks because of total design changes.
>
> From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
> Subject: [PATCH] tracepoint: add tracepoints for debugging oom_score_adj.
>
> oom_score_adj is used for guarding processes from OOM-Killer. One of problem
> is that it's inherited at fork(). When a daemon set oom_score_adj and
> make children, it's hard to know where the value is set.
This sounds like a really thin justification for patching the kernel.
"Help! I don't know what my code is doing!".
Alternatives would include grepping your source code for
"oom_score_adj", or running "strace -f"!
I suspect you did have a good reason for making this change, but it
wasn't explained very well?
--
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