Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1758803AbcCDRjV (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 4 Mar 2016 12:39:21 -0500
Received: from mail-wm0-f66.google.com ([74.125.82.66]:36436 "EHLO
	mail-wm0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1756801AbcCDRjT (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 4 Mar 2016 12:39:19 -0500
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 18:39:16 +0100
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>,
        Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>,
        KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] OOM detection rework v4
Message-ID: <20160304173916.GA24204@dhcp22.suse.cz>
References: <20160302021954.GA22355@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE>
 <20160302095056.GB26701@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <CAAmzW4MoS8K1G+MqavXZAGSpOt92LqZcRzGdGgcop-kQS_tTXg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160302140611.GI26686@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <CAAmzW4NX2sooaghiqkFjFb3Yzazi6rGguQbDjiyWDnfBqP0a-A@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160303092634.GB26202@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <CAAmzW4NQznWcCWrwKk836yB0bhOaHNygocznzuaj5sJeepHfYQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160303152514.GG26202@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20160304052327.GA13022@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE>
 <20160304151558.GF31257@dhcp22.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160304151558.GF31257@dhcp22.suse.cz>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 636
Lines: 19

On Fri 04-03-16 16:15:58, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 04-03-16 14:23:27, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
[...]
> > Unconditional 16 looping and then OOM kill really doesn't make any
> > sense, because it doesn't mean that we already do our best.
> 
> 16 is not really that important. We can change that if that doesn't
> sounds sufficient. But please note that each reclaim round means
> that we have scanned all eligible LRUs to find and reclaim something

this should read "scanned potentially all eligible LRUs..."

> and asked direct compaction to prepare a high order page.
> This sounds like "do our best" to me.


-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs