On Monday 01 October 2007 06:12, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 05:09:28 +1000 Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sunday 30 September 2007 05:20, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > We can't "run out of unfragmented memory" for an order-2 GFP_KERNEL > > > allocation in this workload. We go and synchronously free stuff up to > > > make it work. > > > > > > How did this get broken? > > > > Either no more order-2 pages could be freed, or the ones that were being > > freed were being used by something else (eg. other order-2 slab > > allocations). > > No. The current design of reclaim (for better or for worse) is that for > order 0,1,2 and 3 allocations we just keep on trying until it works. That > got broken and I think it got broken at a design level when that > did_some_progress logic went in. Perhaps something else we did later > worsened things. It will keep trying until it works. It won't have stopped trying (unless I'm very mistaken?), it's just oom killing things merrily along the way. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
