On 18.8.2016 22:01, Ralf-Peter Rohbeck wrote: > On 17.08.2016 23:57, Vlastimil Babka wrote: >>>>> Hmm. I added linux-next git, fetched it etc but apparently I didn't check >>>>> out the right branch. Do you want next-20160817? >>>> Yes this one should be OK. It contains Vlastimil's patches. >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>> This has been working so far. I built a kernel successfully, with dd >>> writing to two drives. There were a number of messages in the trace pipe >>> but compaction/migration always succeeded it seems. >>> I'll run the big torture test overnight. >> Good news, thanks. Did you also apply Joonsoo's suggested removal of >> suitable_migration_target() check, or is this just the linux-next >> version with added trace_printk()/pr_info()? >> >> Vlastimil > Yes, that change was in my test with linux-next-20160817. Here's the diff: > > diff --git a/mm/compaction.c b/mm/compaction.c > index f94ae67..60a9ca2 100644 > --- a/mm/compaction.c > +++ b/mm/compaction.c > @@ -1083,8 +1083,10 @@ static void isolate_freepages(struct > compact_control *cc) > continue; > > /* Check the block is suitable for migration */ > +/* > if (!suitable_migration_target(page)) > continue; > +*/ OK, could you please also try if uncommenting the above still works without OOM? Or just plain linux-next-20160817, I guess we don't need the printk's to test this difference. Thanks a lot! Vlastimil -- 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>