From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756113Ab0ANLAL (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jan 2010 06:00:11 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754938Ab0ANLAJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jan 2010 06:00:09 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:52638 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753509Ab0ANLAI (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jan 2010 06:00:08 -0500 Message-ID: <4B4EF92C.5070402@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:59:56 +0800 From: Xiaotian Feng User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091209 Fedora/3.0-4.fc12 Lightning/1.0pre Thunderbird/3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Morton CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Michal Schmidt , David Howells , Serge Hallyn , Heiko Carstens , Frans Pop Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] accouting: account if a task was killed by OOM killer References: <1263192034-10898-1-git-send-email-dfeng@redhat.com> <20100113145403.e44a5490.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20100113145403.e44a5490.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 01/14/2010 06:54 AM, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 11 Jan 2010 14:40:34 +0800 > Xiaotian Feng 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? > users of taskstats need to know if a job is killed by OOM killer, then perform some automation jobs or notifications. But current taskstats logs AXSIG if a job is killed by signal, so users will be confused by SIGKILL, SIGTERM or OOM killer. > 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@vger.kernel.org would be appropriate. The BSD accounting part is not necessary, I just made it same as taskstats, we can drop BSD accounting part. > > 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. > > >