Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 19-03-18 21:23:12, Mikhail Gavrilov wrote:
> > using swap actively.
> > But I'm already satisfied with proposed patch.
> >
> > I am attached dmesg when I triggering OOM three times. And every time
> > after it system survived.
> > I think this patch should be merged in mainline.
>
> Could you be more specific what is _this_ patch, please?
I think it is
"[PATCH] mm/thp: Do not wait for lock_page() in deferred_split_scan()".
Unless the problem is something like commit 0b1d647a02c5a1b6
("[PATCH] dm: work around mempool_alloc, bio_alloc_bioset deadlocks"),
there should be no need to use io_schedule_timeout().
Mikhail, can you test with only
"[PATCH] mm/thp: Do not wait for lock_page() in deferred_split_scan()" and
"[PATCHv2] mm/shmem: Do not wait for lock_page() in shmem_unused_huge_shrink()"
applied? Because the last dmesg.txt was using io_schedule_timeout()...
