Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262697AbVAFBlT (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Jan 2005 20:41:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262698AbVAFBlS (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Jan 2005 20:41:18 -0500 Received: from smtp209.mail.sc5.yahoo.com ([216.136.130.117]:1125 "HELO smtp209.mail.sc5.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S262697AbVAFBkw (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Jan 2005 20:40:52 -0500 Message-ID: <41DC971F.9030705@yahoo.com.au> Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 12:40:47 +1100 From: Nick Piggin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20041007 Debian/1.7.3-5 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Morton CC: riel@redhat.com, marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com, andrea@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH][5/?] count writeback pages in nr_scanned References: <20050105020859.3192a298.akpm@osdl.org> <20050105180651.GD4597@dualathlon.random> <20050105174934.GC15739@logos.cnet> <20050105134457.03aca488.akpm@osdl.org> <20050105203217.GB17265@logos.cnet> <41DC7D86.8050609@yahoo.com.au> <41DC955D.9020505@yahoo.com.au> <20050105173739.2d91deb3.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <20050105173739.2d91deb3.akpm@osdl.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1211 Lines: 38 Andrew Morton wrote: > Nick Piggin wrote: > >>Rik van Riel wrote: >> >>>On Thu, 6 Jan 2005, Nick Piggin wrote: >>> >>> >>>>I think what Andrea is worried about is that blk_congestion_wait is >>>>fairly vague, and can be a source of instability in the scanning >>>>implementation. >>> >>> >>>The recent OOM kill problem has been happening: >>>1) with cache pressure on lowmem only, due to a block device write >>>2) with no block congestion at all >>>3) with pretty much all pageable lowmme pages in writeback state >>> >>>It appears the VM has trouble dealing with the situation where >>>there is no block congestion to wait on... >>> >> >>Try, together with your nr_scanned patch, to replace blk_congestion_wait >>with io_schedule_timeout. > > > Why? Is the nr_scanned fix insufficient? > I thought it sounded like he implied that nr_scanned was insufficient (otherwise he might have said "to wait on ... but my patch fixes it"). - 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/