On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 08:04:57PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > Hi James! > > On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 05:34:27PM -0500, James Bottomley wrote: > > Yes, but only once in all the testing. With patches 1 and 2 the hang is > > Weird patch 2 makes the large order allocation without ~__GFP_WAIT, so > even COMPACTION=y/n shouldn't matter anymore. Am I misreading > something Mel? > > Removing ~__GFP_WAIT from patch 2 (and adding ~__GFP_REPEAT as a > correctness improvement) and setting COMPACTION=y also should work ok. > should_continue_reclaim could till be looping unless __GFP_REPEAT is cleared if CONFIG_COMPACTION is set. > Removing ~__GFP_WAIT from patch 2 and setting COMPACTION=n is expected > not to work well. > > But compaction should only make the difference if you remove > ~__GFP_WAIT from patch 2. -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>