Re: [patch] oom: document obsolete oom_adj tunable

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

> On Mon, 15 Nov 2010, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> 
> > > /proc/pid/oom_adj was deprecated in August 2010 with the introduction of
> > > the new oom killer heuristic.
> > > 
> > > This patch copies the Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt entry
> > > for this tunable to the Documentation/ABI/obsolete directory so nobody
> > > misses it.
> > > 
> > > Reported-by: Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > NAK. You seems to think shouting claim makes some effect. but It's incorrect.
> > Your childish shout doesn't solve any real world issue. Only code fix does.
> > 
> 
> The tunable is deprecated.  If you are really that concerned about the 
> existing users who you don't think can convert in the next two years, why 
> don't you help them convert?  That fixes the issue, but you're not 
> interested in that.  I offered to convert any open-source users you can 
> list (the hardest part of the conversion is finding who to send patches to 
> :).  You're only interested in continuing to assert your position as 
> correct even when the kernel is obviously moving in a different direction.

Why don't you change by _your_ hand? 

_Usually_ userland software changed at first _by_ who wanted the change.
Example, we fujitsu changed elf core file format when vma are >65536, but
It was not made any breakage. we changed gdb, binutils, elfutils and etc etc
_at_ first.




> 
> Others may have a different opinion of who is being childish in this whole 
> ordeal.



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/