Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 26 Mar 2021 17:00:04 +0000
From:   Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@redhat.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc:     linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/page_alloc: try oom if reclaim is unable to make
 forward progress
Message-ID: <20210326170004.ahzt4xhe6msje7wl@ava.usersys.com>
References: <20210315165837.789593-1-atomlin@redhat.com>
 <YFN8wXwJA59w9twA@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20210319172901.cror2u53b7caws3a@ava.usersys.com>
 <YFh10eSTKY5lbE9u@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20210325210159.r565fvfitoqeuykp@ava.usersys.com>
 <YF2YTNnyzWNHfrEg@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20210326112254.jy5jkiwtgj3pqkt2@ava.usersys.com>
 <YF3/YZPd+iz/xGu6@dhcp22.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YF3/YZPd+iz/xGu6@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri 2021-03-26 16:36 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> We should be focusing on the compaction retry logic and see whether we
> can have some "run away" scenarios there.

Fair enough.

> Seeing so many retries without compaction bailing out sounds like a bug
> in that retry logic.

Agreed - I will continue to look into this.


Kind regards,

-- 
Aaron Tomlin