Re: [resend][PATCH 2/4] Revert "oom: deprecate oom_adj tunable"

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

> > > Yes, I've tested it, and it deprecates the tunable as expected.  A single 
> > > warning message serves the purpose well: let users know one time without 
> > > being overly verbose that the tunable is deprecated and give them 
> > > sufficient time (2 years) to start using the new tunable.  That's how 
> > > deprecation is done.
> > 
> > no sense.
> > 
> > Why do their application need to rewrite for *YOU*? Okey, you will got
> > benefit from your new knob. But NOBDOY use the new one. and People need
> > to rewrite their application even though no benefit. 
> > 
> > Don't do selfish userland breakage!
> 
> And you said you ignore bug even though you have seen it. It suck!


At v2.6.36-rc1, oom-killer doesn't work at all because YOU BROKE.
And I was working on fixing it.

2010-08-19
http://marc.info/?t=128223176900001&r=1&w=2
http://marc.info/?t=128221532700003&r=1&w=2
http://marc.info/?t=128221532500008&r=1&w=2

However, You submitted new crap before the fixing. 

2010-08-15
http://marc.info/?t=128184669600001&r=1&w=2

If you tested mainline a bit, you could find the problem quickly.
You should have fixed mainline kernel at first.


	Again, YOU HAVEN'T TESTED YOUR OWN PATCH AT ALL.





--
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/