On Fri 26-02-16 15:54:19, Hillf Danton wrote: > > > > It didn't really help, I'm afraid: it reduces the actual number of OOM > > kills which occur before the job is terminated, but doesn't stop the > > job from being terminated very soon. > > > > I also tried Hillf's patch (separately) too, but as you expected, > > it didn't seem to make any difference. > > > Perhaps non-costly means NOFAIL as shown by folding the two nofail only means that the page allocator doesn't return with NULL. OOM killer is still not put aside... > patches into one. Can it make any sense? > > thanks > Hillf > --- a/mm/page_alloc.c Thu Feb 25 15:43:18 2016 > +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c Fri Feb 26 15:18:55 2016 > @@ -3113,6 +3113,8 @@ should_reclaim_retry(gfp_t gfp_mask, uns > struct zone *zone; > struct zoneref *z; > > + if (order <= PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER) > + return true; This is defeating the whole purpose of the rework - to behave deterministically. You have just disabled the oom killer completely. This is not the way to go -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>