Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-26 Thread Gerhard Wiesinger
On 23.03.2017 09:38, Mike Galbraith wrote: On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 08:16 +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: On 21.03.2017 08:13, Mike Galbraith wrote: On Tue, 2017-03-21 at 06:59 +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: Is this the correct information? Incomplete, but enough to reiterate

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-26 Thread Gerhard Wiesinger
On 23.03.2017 09:38, Mike Galbraith wrote: On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 08:16 +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: On 21.03.2017 08:13, Mike Galbraith wrote: On Tue, 2017-03-21 at 06:59 +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: Is this the correct information? Incomplete, but enough to reiterate

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-23 Thread Tetsuo Handa
On 2017/03/23 17:38, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 08:16 +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: >> On 21.03.2017 08:13, Mike Galbraith wrote: >>> On Tue, 2017-03-21 at 06:59 +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: >>> Is this the correct information? >>> Incomplete, but enough to reiterate

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-23 Thread Tetsuo Handa
On 2017/03/23 17:38, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 08:16 +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: >> On 21.03.2017 08:13, Mike Galbraith wrote: >>> On Tue, 2017-03-21 at 06:59 +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: >>> Is this the correct information? >>> Incomplete, but enough to reiterate

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-23 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 08:16 +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: > On 21.03.2017 08:13, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > On Tue, 2017-03-21 at 06:59 +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: > > > > > Is this the correct information? > > Incomplete, but enough to reiterate cgroup_disable=memory > > suggestion. > > >

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-23 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 08:16 +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: > On 21.03.2017 08:13, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > On Tue, 2017-03-21 at 06:59 +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: > > > > > Is this the correct information? > > Incomplete, but enough to reiterate cgroup_disable=memory > > suggestion. > > >

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-23 Thread Gerhard Wiesinger
On 21.03.2017 08:13, Mike Galbraith wrote: On Tue, 2017-03-21 at 06:59 +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: Is this the correct information? Incomplete, but enough to reiterate cgroup_disable=memory suggestion. How to collect complete information? Thnx. Ciao, Gerhard

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-23 Thread Gerhard Wiesinger
On 21.03.2017 08:13, Mike Galbraith wrote: On Tue, 2017-03-21 at 06:59 +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: Is this the correct information? Incomplete, but enough to reiterate cgroup_disable=memory suggestion. How to collect complete information? Thnx. Ciao, Gerhard

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-21 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Tue, 2017-03-21 at 06:59 +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: > Is this the correct information? Incomplete, but enough to reiterate cgroup_disable=memory suggestion. -Mike

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-21 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Tue, 2017-03-21 at 06:59 +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: > Is this the correct information? Incomplete, but enough to reiterate cgroup_disable=memory suggestion. -Mike

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-21 Thread Gerhard Wiesinger
On 20.03.2017 04:05, Mike Galbraith wrote: On Sun, 2017-03-19 at 17:02 +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: mount | grep cgroup Just because controllers are mounted doesn't mean they're populated. To check that, you want to look for directories under the mount points with a non-empty 'tasks'. You

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-21 Thread Gerhard Wiesinger
On 20.03.2017 04:05, Mike Galbraith wrote: On Sun, 2017-03-19 at 17:02 +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: mount | grep cgroup Just because controllers are mounted doesn't mean they're populated. To check that, you want to look for directories under the mount points with a non-empty 'tasks'. You

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-19 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Sun, 2017-03-19 at 17:02 +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: > mount | grep cgroup Just because controllers are mounted doesn't mean they're populated. To check that, you want to look for directories under the mount points with a non-empty 'tasks'. You will find some, but memory cgroup

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-19 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Sun, 2017-03-19 at 17:02 +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: > mount | grep cgroup Just because controllers are mounted doesn't mean they're populated. To check that, you want to look for directories under the mount points with a non-empty 'tasks'. You will find some, but memory cgroup

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-19 Thread Tetsuo Handa
On 2017/03/19 17:17, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: > On 17.03.2017 21:08, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: >> On 17.03.2017 18:13, Michal Hocko wrote: >>> On Fri 17-03-17 17:37:48, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: >>> [...] > > 4.11.0-0.rc2.git4.1.fc27.x86_64 > > There are also lockups after some runtime hours to 1

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-19 Thread Tetsuo Handa
On 2017/03/19 17:17, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: > On 17.03.2017 21:08, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: >> On 17.03.2017 18:13, Michal Hocko wrote: >>> On Fri 17-03-17 17:37:48, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: >>> [...] > > 4.11.0-0.rc2.git4.1.fc27.x86_64 > > There are also lockups after some runtime hours to 1

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-19 Thread Gerhard Wiesinger
On 19.03.2017 16:18, Michal Hocko wrote: On Fri 17-03-17 21:08:31, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: On 17.03.2017 18:13, Michal Hocko wrote: On Fri 17-03-17 17:37:48, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: [...] Why does the kernel prefer to swapin/out and not use a.) the free memory? It will use all the free

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-19 Thread Gerhard Wiesinger
On 19.03.2017 16:18, Michal Hocko wrote: On Fri 17-03-17 21:08:31, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: On 17.03.2017 18:13, Michal Hocko wrote: On Fri 17-03-17 17:37:48, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: [...] Why does the kernel prefer to swapin/out and not use a.) the free memory? It will use all the free

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-19 Thread Michal Hocko
On Fri 17-03-17 21:08:31, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: > On 17.03.2017 18:13, Michal Hocko wrote: > >On Fri 17-03-17 17:37:48, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: > >[...] > >>Why does the kernel prefer to swapin/out and not use > >> > >>a.) the free memory? > >It will use all the free memory up to min watermark

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-19 Thread Michal Hocko
On Fri 17-03-17 21:08:31, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: > On 17.03.2017 18:13, Michal Hocko wrote: > >On Fri 17-03-17 17:37:48, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: > >[...] > >>Why does the kernel prefer to swapin/out and not use > >> > >>a.) the free memory? > >It will use all the free memory up to min watermark

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-19 Thread Gerhard Wiesinger
On 17.03.2017 21:08, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: On 17.03.2017 18:13, Michal Hocko wrote: On Fri 17-03-17 17:37:48, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: [...] 4.11.0-0.rc2.git4.1.fc27.x86_64 There are also lockups after some runtime hours to 1 day: Message from syslogd@myserver Mar 19 08:22:33 ...

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-19 Thread Gerhard Wiesinger
On 17.03.2017 21:08, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: On 17.03.2017 18:13, Michal Hocko wrote: On Fri 17-03-17 17:37:48, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: [...] 4.11.0-0.rc2.git4.1.fc27.x86_64 There are also lockups after some runtime hours to 1 day: Message from syslogd@myserver Mar 19 08:22:33 ...

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-17 Thread Gerhard Wiesinger
On 17.03.2017 18:13, Michal Hocko wrote: On Fri 17-03-17 17:37:48, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: [...] Why does the kernel prefer to swapin/out and not use a.) the free memory? It will use all the free memory up to min watermark which is set up based on min_free_kbytes. Makes sense, how is

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-17 Thread Gerhard Wiesinger
On 17.03.2017 18:13, Michal Hocko wrote: On Fri 17-03-17 17:37:48, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: [...] Why does the kernel prefer to swapin/out and not use a.) the free memory? It will use all the free memory up to min watermark which is set up based on min_free_kbytes. Makes sense, how is

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-17 Thread Michal Hocko
On Fri 17-03-17 17:37:48, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: [...] > Why does the kernel prefer to swapin/out and not use > > a.) the free memory? It will use all the free memory up to min watermark which is set up based on min_free_kbytes. > b.) the buffer/cache? the memory reclaim is strongly biased

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-17 Thread Michal Hocko
On Fri 17-03-17 17:37:48, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: [...] > Why does the kernel prefer to swapin/out and not use > > a.) the free memory? It will use all the free memory up to min watermark which is set up based on min_free_kbytes. > b.) the buffer/cache? the memory reclaim is strongly biased

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-17 Thread Gerhard Wiesinger
On 16.03.2017 10:39, Michal Hocko wrote: On Thu 16-03-17 02:23:18, l...@pengaru.com wrote: On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 10:08:44AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: On Thu 16-03-17 01:47:33, l...@pengaru.com wrote: [...] While on the topic of understanding allocation stalls, Philip Freeman recently

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-17 Thread Gerhard Wiesinger
On 16.03.2017 10:39, Michal Hocko wrote: On Thu 16-03-17 02:23:18, l...@pengaru.com wrote: On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 10:08:44AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: On Thu 16-03-17 01:47:33, l...@pengaru.com wrote: [...] While on the topic of understanding allocation stalls, Philip Freeman recently

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-16 Thread Michal Hocko
On Thu 16-03-17 02:23:18, l...@pengaru.com wrote: > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 10:08:44AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Thu 16-03-17 01:47:33, l...@pengaru.com wrote: > > [...] > > > While on the topic of understanding allocation stalls, Philip Freeman > > > recently > > > mailed linux-kernel

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-16 Thread Michal Hocko
On Thu 16-03-17 02:23:18, l...@pengaru.com wrote: > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 10:08:44AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Thu 16-03-17 01:47:33, l...@pengaru.com wrote: > > [...] > > > While on the topic of understanding allocation stalls, Philip Freeman > > > recently > > > mailed linux-kernel

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-16 Thread lkml
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 10:08:44AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Thu 16-03-17 01:47:33, l...@pengaru.com wrote: > [...] > > While on the topic of understanding allocation stalls, Philip Freeman > > recently > > mailed linux-kernel with a similar report, and in his case there are plenty > > of

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-16 Thread lkml
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 10:08:44AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Thu 16-03-17 01:47:33, l...@pengaru.com wrote: > [...] > > While on the topic of understanding allocation stalls, Philip Freeman > > recently > > mailed linux-kernel with a similar report, and in his case there are plenty > > of

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-16 Thread Michal Hocko
On Thu 16-03-17 01:47:33, l...@pengaru.com wrote: [...] > While on the topic of understanding allocation stalls, Philip Freeman recently > mailed linux-kernel with a similar report, and in his case there are plenty of > page cache pages. It was also a GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE 0-order allocation.

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-16 Thread Michal Hocko
On Thu 16-03-17 01:47:33, l...@pengaru.com wrote: [...] > While on the topic of understanding allocation stalls, Philip Freeman recently > mailed linux-kernel with a similar report, and in his case there are plenty of > page cache pages. It was also a GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE 0-order allocation.

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-16 Thread lkml
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 09:27:14AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Thu 16-03-17 07:38:08, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: > [...] > > The following commit is included in that version: > > commit 710531320af876192d76b2c1f68190a1df941b02 > > Author: Michal Hocko > > Date: Wed Feb 22

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-16 Thread lkml
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 09:27:14AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Thu 16-03-17 07:38:08, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: > [...] > > The following commit is included in that version: > > commit 710531320af876192d76b2c1f68190a1df941b02 > > Author: Michal Hocko > > Date: Wed Feb 22 15:45:58 2017 -0800

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-16 Thread Michal Hocko
On Thu 16-03-17 07:38:08, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: [...] > The following commit is included in that version: > commit 710531320af876192d76b2c1f68190a1df941b02 > Author: Michal Hocko > Date: Wed Feb 22 15:45:58 2017 -0800 > > mm, vmscan: cleanup lru size claculations > >

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-16 Thread Michal Hocko
On Thu 16-03-17 07:38:08, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: [...] > The following commit is included in that version: > commit 710531320af876192d76b2c1f68190a1df941b02 > Author: Michal Hocko > Date: Wed Feb 22 15:45:58 2017 -0800 > > mm, vmscan: cleanup lru size claculations > > commit

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-16 Thread Gerhard Wiesinger
On 02.03.2017 08:17, Minchan Kim wrote: Hi Michal, On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 09:12:24AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: On Tue 28-02-17 14:17:23, Minchan Kim wrote: On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:44:49AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: On Mon 27-02-17 18:02:36, Minchan Kim wrote: [...] >From

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-16 Thread Gerhard Wiesinger
On 02.03.2017 08:17, Minchan Kim wrote: Hi Michal, On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 09:12:24AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: On Tue 28-02-17 14:17:23, Minchan Kim wrote: On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:44:49AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: On Mon 27-02-17 18:02:36, Minchan Kim wrote: [...] >From

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-02 Thread Minchan Kim
Hi Michal, On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 09:12:24AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Tue 28-02-17 14:17:23, Minchan Kim wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:44:49AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > On Mon 27-02-17 18:02:36, Minchan Kim wrote: > > > [...] > > > > >From

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-03-02 Thread Minchan Kim
Hi Michal, On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 09:12:24AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Tue 28-02-17 14:17:23, Minchan Kim wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:44:49AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > On Mon 27-02-17 18:02:36, Minchan Kim wrote: > > > [...] > > > > >From

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-02-28 Thread Michal Hocko
On Tue 28-02-17 14:17:23, Minchan Kim wrote: > On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:44:49AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Mon 27-02-17 18:02:36, Minchan Kim wrote: > > [...] > > > >From 9779a1c5d32e2edb64da5cdfcd6f9737b94a247a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > > From: Minchan Kim > > >

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-02-28 Thread Michal Hocko
On Tue 28-02-17 14:17:23, Minchan Kim wrote: > On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:44:49AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Mon 27-02-17 18:02:36, Minchan Kim wrote: > > [...] > > > >From 9779a1c5d32e2edb64da5cdfcd6f9737b94a247a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > > From: Minchan Kim > > > Date: Mon, 27 Feb

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-02-28 Thread Michal Hocko
On Tue 28-02-17 07:06:41, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: > On 27.02.2017 09:27, Michal Hocko wrote: > >On Sun 26-02-17 09:40:42, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: > >>On 04.01.2017 10:11, Michal Hocko wrote: > The VM stops working (e.g. not pingable) after around 8h (will be > restarted >

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-02-28 Thread Michal Hocko
On Tue 28-02-17 07:06:41, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: > On 27.02.2017 09:27, Michal Hocko wrote: > >On Sun 26-02-17 09:40:42, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: > >>On 04.01.2017 10:11, Michal Hocko wrote: > The VM stops working (e.g. not pingable) after around 8h (will be > restarted >

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-02-27 Thread Gerhard Wiesinger
On 27.02.2017 09:27, Michal Hocko wrote: On Sun 26-02-17 09:40:42, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: On 04.01.2017 10:11, Michal Hocko wrote: The VM stops working (e.g. not pingable) after around 8h (will be restarted automatically), happened serveral times. Had also further OOMs which I sent to

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-02-27 Thread Gerhard Wiesinger
On 27.02.2017 09:27, Michal Hocko wrote: On Sun 26-02-17 09:40:42, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: On 04.01.2017 10:11, Michal Hocko wrote: The VM stops working (e.g. not pingable) after around 8h (will be restarted automatically), happened serveral times. Had also further OOMs which I sent to

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-02-27 Thread Minchan Kim
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:44:49AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Mon 27-02-17 18:02:36, Minchan Kim wrote: > [...] > > >From 9779a1c5d32e2edb64da5cdfcd6f9737b94a247a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > From: Minchan Kim > > Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 17:39:06 +0900 > > Subject: [PATCH]

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-02-27 Thread Minchan Kim
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:44:49AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Mon 27-02-17 18:02:36, Minchan Kim wrote: > [...] > > >From 9779a1c5d32e2edb64da5cdfcd6f9737b94a247a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > From: Minchan Kim > > Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 17:39:06 +0900 > > Subject: [PATCH] mm: use up

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-02-27 Thread Michal Hocko
On Mon 27-02-17 18:02:36, Minchan Kim wrote: [...] > >From 9779a1c5d32e2edb64da5cdfcd6f9737b94a247a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Minchan Kim > Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 17:39:06 +0900 > Subject: [PATCH] mm: use up highatomic before OOM kill > > Not-Yet-Signed-off-by: Minchan

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-02-27 Thread Michal Hocko
On Mon 27-02-17 18:02:36, Minchan Kim wrote: [...] > >From 9779a1c5d32e2edb64da5cdfcd6f9737b94a247a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Minchan Kim > Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 17:39:06 +0900 > Subject: [PATCH] mm: use up highatomic before OOM kill > > Not-Yet-Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim > --- >

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-02-27 Thread Minchan Kim
On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 09:40:42AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: > On 04.01.2017 10:11, Michal Hocko wrote: > >>The VM stops working (e.g. not pingable) after around 8h (will be restarted > >>automatically), happened serveral times. > >> > >>Had also further OOMs which I sent to Mincham. >

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-02-27 Thread Minchan Kim
On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 09:40:42AM +0100, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: > On 04.01.2017 10:11, Michal Hocko wrote: > >>The VM stops working (e.g. not pingable) after around 8h (will be restarted > >>automatically), happened serveral times. > >> > >>Had also further OOMs which I sent to Mincham. >

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-02-27 Thread Michal Hocko
On Sun 26-02-17 09:40:42, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: > On 04.01.2017 10:11, Michal Hocko wrote: > >>The VM stops working (e.g. not pingable) after around 8h (will be restarted > >>automatically), happened serveral times. > >> > >>Had also further OOMs which I sent to Mincham. > >Could you post them

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-02-27 Thread Michal Hocko
On Sun 26-02-17 09:40:42, Gerhard Wiesinger wrote: > On 04.01.2017 10:11, Michal Hocko wrote: > >>The VM stops working (e.g. not pingable) after around 8h (will be restarted > >>automatically), happened serveral times. > >> > >>Had also further OOMs which I sent to Mincham. > >Could you post them

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-02-26 Thread Gerhard Wiesinger
On 04.01.2017 10:11, Michal Hocko wrote: The VM stops working (e.g. not pingable) after around 8h (will be restarted automatically), happened serveral times. Had also further OOMs which I sent to Mincham. Could you post them to the mailing list as well, please? Still OOMs on dnf update

Re: Still OOM problems with 4.9er/4.10er kernels

2017-02-26 Thread Gerhard Wiesinger
On 04.01.2017 10:11, Michal Hocko wrote: The VM stops working (e.g. not pingable) after around 8h (will be restarted automatically), happened serveral times. Had also further OOMs which I sent to Mincham. Could you post them to the mailing list as well, please? Still OOMs on dnf update