Re: [PATCH 0/3] OOM detection rework v4

[Michal Hocko]

On Wed 02-03-16 11:28:46, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 02:38:46PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > I'd expect a build in 224M
> > > RAM plus 2G of swap to take so long, that I'd be very grateful to be
> > > OOM killed, even if there is technically enough space.  Unless
> > > perhaps it's some superfast swap that you have?
> > 
> > the swap partition is a standard qcow image stored on my SSD disk. So
> > I guess the IO should be quite fast. This smells like a potential
> > contributor because my reclaim seems to be much faster and that should
> > lead to a more efficient reclaim (in the scanned/reclaimed sense).
> 
> Hmm... This looks like one of potential culprit. If page is in
> writeback, it can't be migrated by compaction with MIGRATE_SYNC_LIGHT.
> In this case, this page works as pinned page and prevent compaction.
> It'd be better to check that changing 'migration_mode = MIGRATE_SYNC' at
> 'no_progress_loops > XXX' will help in this situation.

Would it make sense to use MIGRATE_SYNC for !costly allocations by
default?

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs