Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 18:24:35 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        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-mm@kvack.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Joonsoo Kim <js1304@gmail.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm, oom: protect !costly allocations some more (was: Re:
 [PATCH 0/3] OOM detection rework v4)
Message-ID: <20160308092435.GA3860@swordfish>
References: <1450203586-10959-1-git-send-email-mhocko@kernel.org>
 <20160203132718.GI6757@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <alpine.LSU.2.11.1602241832160.15564@eggly.anvils>
 <20160225092315.GD17573@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20160229210213.GX16930@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20160307160838.GB5028@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20160308035104.GA447@swordfish>
 <20160308090818.GA13542@dhcp22.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160308090818.GA13542@dhcp22.suse.cz>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1396
Lines: 37

On (03/08/16 10:08), Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 08-03-16 12:51:04, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > Hello Michal,
> > 
> > On (03/07/16 17:08), Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Mon 29-02-16 22:02:13, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > Andrew,
> > > > could you queue this one as well, please? This is more a band aid than a
> > > > real solution which I will be working on as soon as I am able to
> > > > reproduce the issue but the patch should help to some degree at least.
> > > 
> > > Joonsoo wasn't very happy about this approach so let me try a different
> > > way. What do you think about the following? Hugh, Sergey does it help
> > > for your load? I have tested it with the Hugh's load and there was no
> > > major difference from the previous testing so at least nothing has blown
> > > up as I am not able to reproduce the issue here.
> > 
> > (next-20160307 + "[PATCH] mm, oom: protect !costly allocations some more")
> > 
> > seems it's significantly less likely to oom-kill now, but I still can see
> > something like this
> 
> Thanks for the testing. This is highly appreciated. If you are able to
> reproduce this then collecting compaction related tracepoints might be
> really helpful.
> 

oh, wow... compaction is disabled, somehow.

  $ zcat /proc/config.gz | grep -i CONFIG_COMPACTION
  # CONFIG_COMPACTION is not set

I should have checked that, sorry!

will enable and re-test.

	-ss