[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BANLkTim67zDojKPezhyAM=rzt-Mop1SFeg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 29 May 2011 20:28:46 -0400
From: Andrew Lutomirski <luto@....edu>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>
Cc: mgorman@...e.de, KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
aarcange@...hat.com, kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com,
fengguang.wu@...el.com, andi@...stfloor.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hannes@...xchg.org, riel@...hat.com
Subject: Re: Easy portable testcase! (Re: Kernel falls apart under light
memory pressure (i.e. linking vmlinux))
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>> It works only if the zone meets high watermark. If allocation is
>> faster than reclaim(ie, it's true for slow swap device), the zone
>> would remain congested.
>> It means swapout would block.
>> As we see the OOM log, we can know that DMA32 zone can't meet high watermark.
>>
>> Does my guessing make sense?
>
> Hi Andrew.
> I got failed your scenario in my machine so could you be willing to
> test this patch for proving my above scenario?
> The patch is just revert patch of 0e093d99[do not sleep on the
> congestion queue...] for 2.6.38.6.
> I would like to test it for proving my above zone congestion scenario.
>
> I did it based on 2.6.38.6 for your easy apply so you must apply it
> cleanly on vanilla v2.6.38.6.
> And you have to add !pgdat_balanced and shrink_slab patch.
No, because my laptop just decided that it doesn't like to turn on. :(
I'll test it on my VM on Tuesday and (fingers crossed) on my repaired
laptop next weekend.
--Andy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists