linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@trippelsdorf.de>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	greg@suse.cz, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Arkadiusz Miskiewicz <a.miskiewicz@gmail.com>,
	Ralf-Peter Rohbeck <Ralf-Peter.Rohbeck@quantum.com>,
	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.com>, Olaf Hering <olaf@aepfle.de>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>, Joonsoo Kim <js1304@gmail.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: OOM detection regressions since 4.7
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2016 12:16:14 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160822101614.GA314@x4> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160822093249.GA14916@dhcp22.suse.cz>

On 2016.08.22 at 11:32 +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> there have been multiple reports [1][2][3][4][5] about pre-mature OOM
> killer invocations since 4.7 which contains oom detection rework. All of
> them were for order-2 (kernel stack) alloaction requests failing because
> of a high fragmentation and compaction failing to make any forward
> progress. While investigating this we have found out that the compaction
> just gives up too early. Vlastimil has been working on compaction
> improvement for quite some time and his series [6] is already sitting
> in mmotm tree. This already helps a lot because it drops some heuristics
> which are more aimed at lower latencies for high orders rather than
> reliability. Joonsoo has then identified further problem with too many
> blocks being marked as unmovable [7] and Vlastimil has prepared a patch
> on top of his series [8] which is also in the mmotm tree now.
> 
> That being said, the regression is real and should be fixed for 4.7
> stable users. [6][8] was reported to help and ooms are no longer
> reproducible. I know we are quite late (rc3) in 4.8 but I would vote
> for mergeing those patches and have them in 4.8. For 4.7 I would go
> with a partial revert of the detection rework for high order requests
> (see patch below). This patch is really trivial. If those compaction
> improvements are just too large for 4.8 then we can use the same patch
> as for 4.7 stable for now and revert it in 4.9 after compaction changes
> are merged.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> [1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160731051121.GB307@x4

For the report [1] above:

markus@x4 linux % cat .config | grep CONFIG_COMPACTION
# CONFIG_COMPACTION is not set

-- 
Markus

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-08-22 10:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-08-22  9:32 OOM detection regressions since 4.7 Michal Hocko
2016-08-22  9:37 ` Michal Hocko
2016-08-22 10:05   ` Greg KH
2016-08-22 10:54     ` Michal Hocko
2016-08-22 13:31       ` Greg KH
2016-08-22 13:42         ` Michal Hocko
2016-08-22 14:02           ` Greg KH
2016-08-22 22:05           ` Andrew Morton
2016-08-23  7:43             ` Michal Hocko
2016-08-25  7:11               ` Michal Hocko
2016-08-25  7:17                 ` Olaf Hering
2016-08-29 14:52                   ` Olaf Hering
2016-08-29 14:54                     ` Olaf Hering
2016-08-29 15:07                     ` Michal Hocko
2016-08-29 15:59                       ` Olaf Hering
2016-08-29 17:28                     ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-29 17:52                       ` Jeff Layton
2016-08-28  5:50                 ` Arkadiusz Miskiewicz
2016-08-25 20:30               ` Ralf-Peter Rohbeck
2016-08-26  6:26                 ` Michal Hocko
2016-08-26 20:17                   ` Ralf-Peter Rohbeck
2016-08-22 10:16 ` Markus Trippelsdorf [this message]
2016-08-22 10:56   ` Michal Hocko
2016-08-22 11:01     ` Markus Trippelsdorf
2016-08-22 11:13       ` Michal Hocko
2016-08-22 11:20         ` Markus Trippelsdorf
2016-08-23  4:52 ` Joonsoo Kim
2016-08-23  7:33   ` Michal Hocko
2016-08-23  7:40     ` Markus Trippelsdorf
2016-08-23  7:48       ` Michal Hocko
2016-08-23 19:08     ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-24  6:32       ` Michal Hocko
2016-08-24  5:01     ` Joonsoo Kim
2016-08-24  7:04       ` Michal Hocko
2016-08-24  7:29         ` Joonsoo Kim

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20160822101614.GA314@x4 \
    --to=markus@trippelsdorf.de \
    --cc=Ralf-Peter.Rohbeck@quantum.com \
    --cc=a.miskiewicz@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=greg@suse.cz \
    --cc=js1304@gmail.com \
    --cc=jslaby@suse.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=olaf@aepfle.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).