Re: [PATCH] mm, oom: protect !costly allocations some more (was: Re: [PATCH 0/3] OOM detection rework v4)

[Sergey Senozhatsky]

On (03/07/16 17:08), Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 29-02-16 22:02:13, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > Andrew,
> > could you queue this one as well, please? This is more a band aid than a
> > real solution which I will be working on as soon as I am able to
> > reproduce the issue but the patch should help to some degree at least.
> 
> Joonsoo wasn't very happy about this approach so let me try a different
> way. What do you think about the following? Hugh, Sergey does it help
> for your load? I have tested it with the Hugh's load and there was no
> major difference from the previous testing so at least nothing has blown
> up as I am not able to reproduce the issue here.
> 
> Other changes in the compaction are still needed but I would like to not
> depend on them right now.

works fine for me.

$  cat /proc/vmstat | egrep -e "compact|swap"
pgsteal_kswapd_dma 7
pgsteal_kswapd_dma32 6457075
pgsteal_kswapd_normal 1462767
pgsteal_kswapd_movable 0
pgscan_kswapd_dma 18
pgscan_kswapd_dma32 6544126
pgscan_kswapd_normal 1495604
pgscan_kswapd_movable 0
kswapd_inodesteal 29
kswapd_low_wmark_hit_quickly 1168
kswapd_high_wmark_hit_quickly 1627
compact_migrate_scanned 5762793
compact_free_scanned 54090239
compact_isolated 1303895
compact_stall 1542
compact_fail 1117
compact_success 425
compact_kcompatd_wake 0

no OOM-kills after 6 rounds of tests.

Tested-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@xxxxxxxxx>

thanks!

	-ss