Re: [PATCH] Remove OOM killer from try_to_free_pages / all_unreclaimable braindamage
From: Marcelo Tosatti
Date: Tue Nov 09 2004 - 05:41:19 EST
On Mon, Nov 08, 2004 at 06:35:52PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Nick Piggin <piggin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I'm not sure... it could also be just be a fluke
> > due to chaotic effects in the mm, I suppose :|
> 2.6 scans less than 2.4 before declaring oom. I looked at the 2.4
> implementation and thought "whoa, that's crazy - let's reduce it and see
> who complains". My three-year-old memory tells me it was reduced by 2x to
> We need to find testcases (dammit) and do the analysis. It could be that
> we're simply not scanning far enough.
When reading the code I was really suspicious of the all_unreclaimable code.
It basically stops scanning when reaching OOM conditions - that might be it.
I tried to disable it (ignore it if priority==0) - result: very slow progress
on extreme load.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/