Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-19 Thread Zlatko Calusic
On 11.12.2012 01:19, Zlatko Calusic wrote: On 10.12.2012 20:13, Linus Torvalds wrote: It's worth giving this as much testing as is at all possible, but at the same time I really don't think I can delay 3.7 any more without messing up the holiday season too much. So unless something obvious pops

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-11 Thread Zlatko Calusic
On 11.12.2012 01:19, Zlatko Calusic wrote: I will now make one last attempt, I've just reverted 2 Johannes' commits that were also applied in attempt to fix breakage that removing gfp_no_kswapd introduced, namely ed23ec4 & c702418. For various reasons the results of this test will be available t

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-10 Thread Hugh Dickins
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012, Linus Torvalds wrote: > [ Adding High Dickins because of the shmem oops. ] I had already noticed, and was about to reply; but only then refreshed my mbox window, to find that you've already done it all for me: thanks. > > On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Zlatko Calusic > w

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-10 Thread Zlatko Calusic
On 10.12.2012 22:54, Borislav Petkov wrote: On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 01:47:23PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote: Aren't we gonna consider the out-of-tree vbox modules being loaded and causing some corruptions like maybe the single-bit error a

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-10 Thread Borislav Petkov
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 01:47:23PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > > > Aren't we gonna consider the out-of-tree vbox modules being loaded and > > causing some corruptions like maybe the single-bit error above? > > > > I'm also thinking of

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-10 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > Aren't we gonna consider the out-of-tree vbox modules being loaded and > causing some corruptions like maybe the single-bit error above? > > I'm also thinking of this here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/10/6/317 Yup, that looks more likely,

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-10 Thread Borislav Petkov
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 01:28:54PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > [ Adding High Dickins because of the shmem oops. ] > > On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Zlatko Calusic > wrote: > > > > And funny thing that you mention i915, because yesterday my daughter > > managed to lock up our laptop hard (

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-10 Thread Linus Torvalds
[ Adding High Dickins because of the shmem oops. ] On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Zlatko Calusic wrote: > > And funny thing that you mention i915, because yesterday my daughter managed > to lock up our laptop hard (that was a first), and this is what I found in > kern.log after restart: > >

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-10 Thread Zlatko Calusic
On 10.12.2012 20:13, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > It's worth giving this as much testing as is at all possible, but at > the same time I really don't think I can delay 3.7 any more without > messing up the holiday season too much. So unless something obvious > pops up, I will do the release tonight.

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-10 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Zlatko Calusic wrote: > > I was about to apply the patch that you sent, and reboot the server, but it > seems there's no point because the patch is flawed? > > Anyway, if and when you have a proper one, I'll be glad to test it for you > and report results. I have

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-10 Thread Zlatko Calusic
On 10.12.2012 19:01, Mel Gorman wrote: In this last-minute disaster, I'm not thinking properly at all any more. The shrink slab disabling should have happened before the loop_again but even then it's wrong because it's just covering over the problem. The way order and testorder interact with how

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-10 Thread Zlatko Calusic
On 10.12.2012 12:03, Mel Gorman wrote: There is a big difference between a direct reclaim/compaction for THP and kswapd doing the same work. Direct reclaim/compaction will try once, give up quickly and defer requests in the near future to avoid impacting the system heavily for THP. The same appli

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-10 Thread Mel Gorman
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 11:39:04AM -0500, Johannes Weiner wrote: > On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 11:03:37AM +, Mel Gorman wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 08, 2012 at 05:01:42PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Sat, 8 Dec 2012, Zlatko Calusic wrote: > > > > Or sooner... in short: nothing's changed! > > >

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-10 Thread Johannes Weiner
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 11:03:37AM +, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Sat, Dec 08, 2012 at 05:01:42PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Sat, 8 Dec 2012, Zlatko Calusic wrote: > > > Or sooner... in short: nothing's changed! > > > > > > On a 4GB RAM system, where applications use close to 2GB, kswapd l

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-10 Thread Mel Gorman
On Sat, Dec 08, 2012 at 05:01:42PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Sat, 8 Dec 2012, Zlatko Calusic wrote: > > > > Or sooner... in short: nothing's changed! > > > > On a 4GB RAM system, where applications use close to 2GB, kswapd likes to > > keep > > around 1GB free (unused), leaving onl

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-09 Thread Zdenek Kabelac
Dne 9.12.2012 02:01, Linus Torvalds napsal(a): On Sat, 8 Dec 2012, Zlatko Calusic wrote: Or sooner... in short: nothing's changed! On a 4GB RAM system, where applications use close to 2GB, kswapd likes to keep around 1GB free (unused), leaving only 1GB for page/buffer cache. If I force bigge

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-08 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Sat, 8 Dec 2012, Zlatko Calusic wrote: > > Or sooner... in short: nothing's changed! > > On a 4GB RAM system, where applications use close to 2GB, kswapd likes to keep > around 1GB free (unused), leaving only 1GB for page/buffer cache. If I force > bigger page cache by reading a big file and

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-08 Thread Zlatko Calusic
On 08.12.2012 13:06, Zlatko Calusic wrote: On 06.12.2012 20:31, Linus Torvalds wrote: Ok, people seem to be reporting success. I've applied Johannes' last patch with the new tested-by tags. I've been testing this patch since it was applied, and it certainly fixes the kswapd craziness issue,

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-08 Thread Zlatko Calusic
On 06.12.2012 20:31, Linus Torvalds wrote: Ok, people seem to be reporting success. I've applied Johannes' last patch with the new tested-by tags. I've been testing this patch since it was applied, and it certainly fixes the kswapd craziness issue, good work Johannes! But, it's still not p

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-08 Thread Jiri Slaby
On 12/04/2012 05:11 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote: > On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 10:15:09AM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote: >> It does not apply to -next :/. Should I try anything else? > > The COMPACTION_BUILD changed to IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_COMPACTION), below > is a -next patch. I hope you don't run into other p

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-06 Thread Rik van Riel
On 12/06/2012 03:23 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote: From: Johannes Weiner Subject: [patch] mm: vmscan: fix inappropriate zone congestion clearing c702418 ("mm: vmscan: do not keep kswapd looping forever due to individual uncompactable zones") removed zone watermark checks from the compaction code i

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-06 Thread Johannes Weiner
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 11:31:21AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Ok, people seem to be reporting success. > > I've applied Johannes' last patch with the new tested-by tags. > > Johannes (or anybody else, for that matter), please holler LOUDLY if > you disagreed.. (or if I used the wrong version

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-06 Thread Rik van Riel
On 12/06/2012 02:31 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: Ok, people seem to be reporting success. I've applied Johannes' last patch with the new tested-by tags. Johannes (or anybody else, for that matter), please holler LOUDLY if you disagreed.. (or if I used the wrong version of the patch, there's been s

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-06 Thread Linus Torvalds
Ok, people seem to be reporting success. I've applied Johannes' last patch with the new tested-by tags. Johannes (or anybody else, for that matter), please holler LOUDLY if you disagreed.. (or if I used the wrong version of the patch, there's been several, afaik). Linus -- To un

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-06 Thread Bruno Wolff III
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 21:01:33 -0600, Bruno Wolff III wrote: On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 16:42:10 -0500, Johannes Weiner wrote: kernel-3.7.0-0.rc7.git1.2.van.main.knurd.kswap.4.fc18.i686 and kernel-3.7.0-0.rc7.git1.2.van.main.knurd.kswap.4.fc18.x86_64 for over 24hours with no evidence of prob

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-06 Thread Zdenek Kabelac
Dne 4.12.2012 10:05, Zdenek Kabelac napsal(a): Dne 3.12.2012 20:18, Johannes Weiner napsal(a): Szia Zdenek, On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 04:23:15PM +0100, Zdenek Kabelac wrote: Ok, bad news - I've been hit by kswapd0 loop again - my kernel git commit cc19528bd3084c3c2d870b31a3578da8c69952f3 again

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-06 Thread Thorsten Leemhuis
Hi! Just a quick update Johannes Weiner wrote on 03.12.2012 20:42: > On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 09:30:12AM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > >> BTW, I built that kernel without the patch you mentioned in >> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.mm/90911/focus=91153 >> ("buffer_heads_over_limit

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-04 Thread Bruno Wolff III
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 16:42:10 -0500, Johannes Weiner wrote: kernel-3.7.0-0.rc7.git1.2.van.main.knurd.kswap.4.fc18.i686 and kernel-3.7.0-0.rc7.git1.2.van.main.knurd.kswap.4.fc18.x86_64 for over 24hours with no evidence of problems with kswapd" Now waiting for results from Jiri, Zdenek and

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-04 Thread Johannes Weiner
On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 02:42:08PM -0500, Johannes Weiner wrote: > On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 09:30:12AM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > >> John was able to reproduce the problem quickly with a kernel that > > >> contained the patch from your mail. For details see > > > > > > [stripped: all the g

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-04 Thread Johannes Weiner
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 05:22:38PM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote: > On 12/04/2012 05:11 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote: > Any chance you could retry with this patch on top? > >> > >> It does not apply to -next :/. Should I try anything else? > > > > The COMPACTION_BUILD changed to IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_COMP

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-04 Thread Jiri Slaby
On 12/04/2012 05:11 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote: Any chance you could retry with this patch on top? >> >> It does not apply to -next :/. Should I try anything else? > > The COMPACTION_BUILD changed to IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_COMPACTION), below > is a -next patch. I hope you don't run into other prob

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-04 Thread Johannes Weiner
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 10:05:29AM +0100, Zdenek Kabelac wrote: > Dne 3.12.2012 20:18, Johannes Weiner napsal(a): > >Szia Zdenek, > > > >On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 04:23:15PM +0100, Zdenek Kabelac wrote: > >>Ok, bad news - I've been hit by kswapd0 loop again - > >>my kernel git commit cc19528bd3084c3

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-04 Thread Johannes Weiner
On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 10:15:09AM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote: > On 12/04/2012 10:05 AM, Zdenek Kabelac wrote: > > Dne 3.12.2012 20:18, Johannes Weiner napsal(a): > >> Szia Zdenek, > >> > >> On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 04:23:15PM +0100, Zdenek Kabelac wrote: > >>> Ok, bad news - I've been hit by kswapd0

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-04 Thread Jiri Slaby
On 12/04/2012 10:05 AM, Zdenek Kabelac wrote: > Dne 3.12.2012 20:18, Johannes Weiner napsal(a): >> Szia Zdenek, >> >> On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 04:23:15PM +0100, Zdenek Kabelac wrote: >>> Ok, bad news - I've been hit by kswapd0 loop again - >>> my kernel git commit cc19528bd3084c3c2d870b31a3578da8c6

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-04 Thread Zdenek Kabelac
Dne 3.12.2012 20:18, Johannes Weiner napsal(a): Szia Zdenek, On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 04:23:15PM +0100, Zdenek Kabelac wrote: Ok, bad news - I've been hit by kswapd0 loop again - my kernel git commit cc19528bd3084c3c2d870b31a3578da8c69952f3 again shown kswapd0 for couple minutes on CPU. It see

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-04 Thread Jiri Slaby
On 12/03/2012 02:14 PM, Jiri Slaby wrote: > On 11/27/2012 09:48 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote: >> I hope I included everybody that participated in the various threads >> on kswapd getting stuck / exhibiting high CPU usage. We were looking >> at at least three root causes as far as I can see, so it's n

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-03 Thread Johannes Weiner
On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 09:30:12AM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > >> John was able to reproduce the problem quickly with a kernel that > >> contained the patch from your mail. For details see > > > > [stripped: all the glory details of what likely went wrong and lead > > to the problem john see

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-03 Thread Johannes Weiner
Szia Zdenek, On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 04:23:15PM +0100, Zdenek Kabelac wrote: > Ok, bad news - I've been hit by kswapd0 loop again - > my kernel git commit cc19528bd3084c3c2d870b31a3578da8c69952f3 again > shown kswapd0 for couple minutes on CPU. > > It seemed to go instantly away when I've drop c

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-03 Thread Zdenek Kabelac
Dne 28.11.2012 10:45, Mel Gorman napsal(a): (Adding Thorsten to cc) On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 03:48:34PM -0500, Johannes Weiner wrote: Hi everyone, I hope I included everybody that participated in the various threads on kswapd getting stuck / exhibiting high CPU usage. We were looking at at lea

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-03 Thread Jiri Slaby
On 11/27/2012 09:48 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote: > I hope I included everybody that participated in the various threads > on kswapd getting stuck / exhibiting high CPU usage. We were looking > at at least three root causes as far as I can see, so it's not really > clear who observed which problem.

Fedora repo (was: Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7)

2012-12-03 Thread Borislav Petkov
On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 09:30:12AM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Np; BTW, in case anybody here on LKML cares: I started maintaining a > side repo (PPA in ubuntu speak) a few weeks ago that offers kernel > vanilla builds (mainline and stable) for the Fedora 17 and 18; see > https://fedoraproject

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-12-03 Thread Thorsten Leemhuis
Hi! Johannes Weiner wrote on 01.12.2012 01:45: > On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 01:39:03PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> /me wonders how to elegantly get out of his man-in-the-middle position > You control the mighty koji :-) Something even a journalist can ;-) > But seriously, this is very helpfu

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-11-30 Thread Johannes Weiner
Hi Thorsten, On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 01:39:03PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > /me wonders how to elegantly get out of his man-in-the-middle position You control the mighty koji :-) But seriously, this is very helpful, thank you! John now also Cc'd directly. > John was able to reproduce the

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-11-30 Thread Thorsten Leemhuis
Johannes Weiner wrote on 29.11.2012 18:05: > On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 04:30:12PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> Mel Gorman wrote on 29.11.2012 00:54: >> > On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 02:52:15PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: >> >> On Wed, 28 Nov 2012 10:13:59 + >> >> Mel Gorman wrote: >> >> > Base

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-11-29 Thread Johannes Weiner
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 04:30:12PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Mel Gorman wrote on 29.11.2012 00:54: > > On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 02:52:15PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > >> On Wed, 28 Nov 2012 10:13:59 + > >> Mel Gorman wrote: > >> > >> > Based on the reports I've seen I expect the foll

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-11-29 Thread Thorsten Leemhuis
Mel Gorman wrote on 29.11.2012 00:54: > On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 02:52:15PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: >> On Wed, 28 Nov 2012 10:13:59 + >> Mel Gorman wrote: >> >> > Based on the reports I've seen I expect the following to work for 3.7 >> > Keep >> > 96710098 mm: revert "mm: vmscan: scale n

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-11-28 Thread Andrew Morton
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012 23:54:12 + Mel Gorman wrote: > On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 02:52:15PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Wed, 28 Nov 2012 10:13:59 + > > Mel Gorman wrote: > > > > > Based on the reports I've seen I expect the following to work for 3.7 > > > > > > Keep > > > 96710098 m

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-11-28 Thread Mel Gorman
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 02:52:15PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 28 Nov 2012 10:13:59 + > Mel Gorman wrote: > > > Based on the reports I've seen I expect the following to work for 3.7 > > > > Keep > > 96710098 mm: revert "mm: vmscan: scale number of pages reclaimed by > > reclaim/

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-11-28 Thread Andrew Morton
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012 10:13:59 + Mel Gorman wrote: > Based on the reports I've seen I expect the following to work for 3.7 > > Keep > 96710098 mm: revert "mm: vmscan: scale number of pages reclaimed by > reclaim/compaction based on failures" > ef6c5be6 fix incorrect NR_FREE_PAGES accounti

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-11-28 Thread Mel Gorman
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 10:13:59AM +, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 03:19:38PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 05:02:36PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote: > > >> > > >> Kswapd going crazy is certainl

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-11-28 Thread Jiri Slaby
On 11/28/2012 02:35 PM, Zdenek Kabelac wrote: > and added slightly modified patch from Jiri > (https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/11/15/950 > (Unsure where it still applies for -rc7??) It is needed for -next only. And if you have recent -next, it's already there... thanks, -- js suse labs -- To unsubscr

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-11-28 Thread Zdenek Kabelac
Dne 27.11.2012 21:58, Linus Torvalds napsal(a): Note that in the meantime, I've also applied (through Andrew) the patch that reverts commit c654345924f7 (see commit 82b212f40059 'Revert "mm: remove __GFP_NO_KSWAPD"'). I wonder if that revert may be bogus, and a result of this same issue. Maybe t

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-11-28 Thread Thorsten Leemhuis
Mel Gorman wrote on 28.11.2012 11:13: > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 03:19:38PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote: >> > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 05:02:36PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote: > >> And the one who comes out gets to explain to me which patch(es)

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-11-28 Thread Mel Gorman
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 03:19:38PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 05:02:36PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote: > >> > >> Kswapd going crazy is certainly a large part of the problem. > >> > >> However, that leaves the issu

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-11-28 Thread Mel Gorman
(Adding Thorsten to cc) On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 03:48:34PM -0500, Johannes Weiner wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I hope I included everybody that participated in the various threads > on kswapd getting stuck / exhibiting high CPU usage. We were looking > at at least three root causes as far as I can

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-11-27 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote: > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 05:02:36PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote: >> >> Kswapd going crazy is certainly a large part of the problem. >> >> However, that leaves the issue of page_alloc.c waking up >> kswapd when the system is not actually low on

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-11-27 Thread Johannes Weiner
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 05:02:36PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote: > On 11/27/2012 04:49 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote: > >On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 04:16:52PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote: > >>On 11/27/2012 03:58 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > >>>Note that in the meantime, I've also applied (through Andrew) the >

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-11-27 Thread Rik van Riel
On 11/27/2012 04:49 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote: On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 04:16:52PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote: On 11/27/2012 03:58 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: Note that in the meantime, I've also applied (through Andrew) the patch that reverts commit c654345924f7 (see commit 82b212f40059 'Revert "m

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-11-27 Thread Johannes Weiner
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 04:16:52PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote: > On 11/27/2012 03:58 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > >Note that in the meantime, I've also applied (through Andrew) the > >patch that reverts commit c654345924f7 (see commit 82b212f40059 > >'Revert "mm: remove __GFP_NO_KSWAPD"'). > > > >I w

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-11-27 Thread Johannes Weiner
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 12:58:18PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Note that in the meantime, I've also applied (through Andrew) the > patch that reverts commit c654345924f7 (see commit 82b212f40059 > 'Revert "mm: remove __GFP_NO_KSWAPD"'). > > I wonder if that revert may be bogus, and a result of

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-11-27 Thread Rik van Riel
On 11/27/2012 03:58 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: Note that in the meantime, I've also applied (through Andrew) the patch that reverts commit c654345924f7 (see commit 82b212f40059 'Revert "mm: remove __GFP_NO_KSWAPD"'). I wonder if that revert may be bogus, and a result of this same issue. Maybe tha

Re: kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-11-27 Thread Linus Torvalds
Note that in the meantime, I've also applied (through Andrew) the patch that reverts commit c654345924f7 (see commit 82b212f40059 'Revert "mm: remove __GFP_NO_KSWAPD"'). I wonder if that revert may be bogus, and a result of this same issue. Maybe that revert should be reverted, and replaced with y

kswapd craziness in 3.7

2012-11-27 Thread Johannes Weiner
Hi everyone, I hope I included everybody that participated in the various threads on kswapd getting stuck / exhibiting high CPU usage. We were looking at at least three root causes as far as I can see, so it's not really clear who observed which problem. Please correct me if the reported-by, tes