On (22/08/09 18:11), Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > > > > /me needs to confirm. > > > > > > With that commit reverted, I see no more I/O errors, only oom-killer > > > messages (which is OK IMO, provided I write 1G of urandom on a machine w/ > > > 800M of RAM): > > > > Hmm... So handle allocation always succeeds in the slow path? (when we > > try to allocate it second time) > > Yeah I can see how handle re-allocation with direct reclaim can make it more > successful, but in exchange it oom-kills some user-space process, I suppose. > Is oom-kill really a good alternative though? We likely will need to revert e7be8d1dd983 given that it has some user visible changes. But, honestly, failing zram write vs oom-kill a user-space is a tough choice.
