On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 13:40 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartmann wrote: > On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 01:31:56PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 20:48 +0200, Kay Sievers wrote: > > > On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 20:27 +0200, Kay Sievers wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 8:03 PM, Dave Jones <da...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > I noticed that the format of the oom-killer output seems to have > > > > > changed, and > > > > > now it spews stuff like.. > > > > > > > > > > [49461.758070] lowmem_reserve[]: > > > > > [49461.758071] 0 > > > > > [49461.758071] 2643 > > > > > [49461.758071] 3878 > > > > > [49461.758072] 3878 > > > > > [49461.758072] > > > > > [49461.758072] Node 0 > > > > > > > > > Does the oom-killer code need modifying, or the printk code ? > > > > > I know there's been some regressions in this area recently, but this > > > > > is still > > > > > happening on the current tree > > > > > (8c84bf4166a4698296342841a549bbee03860ac0) > > > > > > > > This likely fixes it: > > > > > > > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/kay/patches.git;a=blob;f=kmsg-merge-cont.patch;hb=HEAD > > > > > > > > Let me check if it does, and if I can reproduce it. > > > > > > It looks fine here with the above mentioned patch: > > > [ 0.000000] lowmem_reserve[]: > > > [ 0.000000] 0 > > > [ 0.000000] 0 > > > [ 0.000000] 0 > > > [ 0.000000] 0 > > > [ 0.000000] > > > [ 0.000000] DMA: > > > [ 0.000000] 1*4kB > > > [ 0.000000] 0*8kB > > > [ 0.000000] 0*16kB > > > [ 0.000000] 1*32kB > > > [ 0.000000] 2*64kB > > > [ 0.000000] 1*128kB > > > [ 0.000000] 1*256kB > > > [ 0.000000] 0*512kB > > > [ 0.000000] 1*1024kB > > > [ 0.000000] 1*2048kB > > > [ 0.000000] 3*4096kB > > > [ 0.000000] = 15908kB > > > > > > becomes: > > > [ 0.000000] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0 0 > > > [ 0.000000] DMA: 1*4kB 0*8kB 0*16kB 1*32kB 2*64kB 1*128kB 1*256kB > > > 0*512kB 1*1024kB 1*2048kB 3*4096kB = 15908kB > > > > Hi Kay. > > > > That single patch doesn't apply cleanly to Linus' > > 8c84bf4166a4698296342841a549bbee03860ac0 > > > > What else is necessary? > > > > Your tree seems to have a collection of random patches. > > > > It might be useful to clone Linus' tree and produce a > > branch with all the necessary printk patches in it so > > someone else could pull it. > > They should all now be in my driver-core-next branch that will show up > in the next linux-next release, so having a separate tree isn't > necessary.
I don't think so. There are real defects in the existing code. These are patches that are necessary _now_. not for a -next 3.6 future. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
