Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263085AbUFXAP2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Jun 2004 20:15:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263126AbUFXAP2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Jun 2004 20:15:28 -0400 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:29629 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263085AbUFXAP1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Jun 2004 20:15:27 -0400 Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 17:18:18 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: William Lee Irwin III Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [oom]: [0/4] fix OOM deadlock running OAST Message-Id: <20040623171818.39b73d52.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <20040624000308.GK1552@holomorphy.com> References: <0406231407.HbLbJbXaHbKbWa5aJb1a4aKb0a3aKb1a0a2aMbMbYa3aLbMb3aJbWaJbXaMbLb1a342@holomorphy.com> <20040623151659.70333c6d.akpm@osdl.org> <20040623223146.GG1552@holomorphy.com> <20040623153758.40e3a865.akpm@osdl.org> <20040623230730.GJ1552@holomorphy.com> <20040623163819.013c8585.akpm@osdl.org> <20040624000308.GK1552@holomorphy.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.7 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i586-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1435 Lines: 34 William Lee Irwin III wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 04:38:19PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > I don't think it _is_ relevant. Wev'e scanned the crap out of all the > > eligible zones, found nothing swappable outable or otherwise reclaimable. > > That's as good a definition of oom as you're likely to get. It takes care > > of mlocked user memory too. > > The actual net effect of all this is blowing away if (nr_swap_pages > 0) > for __GFP_WIRED allocations. Removing those 2 lines (and the one line of > whitespace next to it) will pass the test I observed failure in. OK. > It's a > judgment call as to whether it's beneficial in general, as it does > insulate userspace somewhat from needing to wait for slow IO being the > ostensible cause of the allocation failure. mm... I can only see that happening if the IO system is retiring write requests at much less than 10/sec, which seems unlikely. Still, that can be tuned around. > RedHat vendor kernels have removed the check entirely When telling us this sort of thing, please always specify the kernel version. I assume you're referring to a 2.6 kernel? If so, some thwapping might be in order. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/