On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 11:51:57AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > TL;DR > drop the last patch, check whether memory cgroup is enabled and retest > with cgroup_disable=memory to see whether this is memcg related and if > it is _not_ then try to test with the patch below Right, it seems we might be looking in the right direction! So I removed the previous patch from my kernel and verified if memory cgroup was enabled, and indeed, it was. So I booted with cgroup_disable=memory and ran my ordinary test again ... and in fact, no ooms! I could have the firefox sources building and unpack half a dozen big tarballs, which would previously with 99% certainty already trigger an OOM upon unpacking the first tarball. Also, the system seemed to run noticably "nicer", in the sense that the other processes I had running (like htop) would not get delayed / hung. The new patch you sent has, as per your instructions, NOT been applied. I've provided a log of this run, it's available at: http://ftp.tisys.org/pub/misc/boerne_2016-12-23.log.xz As no OOMs or other bad situations occured, no memory information was forcibly logged. However, about three times I triggered a memory info manually via SysReq, because I guess that might be interesting for you to look at. I'd like to run the same test on my second machine as well just to make sure that cgroup_disable=memory has an effect there too. I should be able to do that later tonight and will report back as soon as I know more! > I would appreciate to stick with your setup to not pull new unknows into > the picture. No problem! It's just likely that I won't be able to test during the following days until Dec 27th, but after that I should be back to normal and thus be able to run further tests in a timely fashion. :-) Greetings Nils -- 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>