On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 08:28:46PM -0400, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> It works only if the zone meets high watermark. If allocation is > >> faster than reclaim(ie, it's true for slow swap device), the zone > >> would remain congested. > >> It means swapout would block. > >> As we see the OOM log, we can know that DMA32 zone can't meet high watermark. > >> > >> Does my guessing make sense? > > > > Hi Andrew. > > I got failed your scenario in my machine so could you be willing to > > test this patch for proving my above scenario? > > The patch is just revert patch of 0e093d99[do not sleep on the > > congestion queue...] for 2.6.38.6. > > I would like to test it for proving my above zone congestion scenario. > > > > I did it based on 2.6.38.6 for your easy apply so you must apply it > > cleanly on vanilla v2.6.38.6. > > And you have to add !pgdat_balanced and shrink_slab patch. > > No, because my laptop just decided that it doesn't like to turn on. :( > > I'll test it on my VM on Tuesday and (fingers crossed) on my repaired > laptop next weekend. Any updates on this? -- 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>