Hi, This is the same Mel as mel@xxxxxxxxxx The mail server the address is on has no power until Tuesday so I'm not going to be very unresponsive until then. Monday is also a public holiday here and apparently they are upgrading the power transformers near the building. On 10/23/09, Karol Lewandowski <karol.k.lewandowski@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 06:58:10PM +0200, Karol Lewandowski wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 03:22:31PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: >> > Test 3: If you are getting allocation failures, try with the following >> > patch >> > >> > 3/5 vmscan: Force kswapd to take notice faster when high-order >> > watermarks are being hit > >> No, problem doesn't go away with these patches (1+2+3). However, from >> my testing this particular patch makes it way, way harder to trigger >> allocation failures (but these are still present). >> >> This bothers me - should I test following patches with or without >> above patch? This patch makes bug harder to find, IMVHO it doesn't >> fix the real problem. > .. > >> Test 4: If you are still getting failures, apply the following >> 4/5 page allocator: Pre-emptively wake kswapd when high-order watermarks >> are hit > > Ok, I've tested patches 1+2+4 and bug, while very hard to trigger, is > still present. I'll test complete 1-4 patchset as time permits. > And also patch 5 please which is the revert. Patch 5 as pointed out is probably a red herring. Hwoever, it has changed the timing and made a difference for some testing so I'd like to know if it helps yours as well. As things stand, it looks like patches 1+2 should certainly go ahead. I need to give more thought on patches 3 and 4 as to why they help Tobias but not anyone elses testing. Thanks -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-testers" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
