Re: [Bug #14141] order 2 page allocation failures in iwlagn

Frans Pop
2009-10-06T10:23:43Z

On Tuesday 06 October 2009, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Oct 2009, Frans Pop wrote:
> > And the winner is:
> > 2ff05b2b4eac2e63d345fc731ea151a060247f53 is first bad commit
> > commit 2ff05b2b4eac2e63d345fc731ea151a060247f53
> > Author: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
> > Date: Tue Jun 16 15:32:56 2009 -0700
> >
> > oom: move oom_adj value from task_struct to mm_struct
> >
> > I'm confident that the bisection is good. The test case was very
> > reliable while zooming in on the merge from akpm.
>
> I doubt it for two reasons: (i) this commit was reverted in 0753ba0
> since 2.6.31-rc7 and is no longer in the kernel, and (ii) these are
> GFP_ATOMIC allocations which would be unaffected by oom killer scores.

OK. Looks like I have been getting some false "good" results. I've been
redoing part of the bisect and am getting close to a new candidate. Will
explain further when I have that.

Cheers,
FJP