(Michal is offline, asking Johannes instead.) Tetsuo Handa wrote: > (A) The order-0 __GFP_WAIT allocation fails immediately upon OOM condition > despite we didn't remove the > > /* > * In this implementation, order <= PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER > * means __GFP_NOFAIL, but that may not be true in other > * implementations. > */ > if (order <= PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER) > return 1; > > check in should_alloc_retry(). Is this what you expected? This behavior is caused by commit 9879de7373fcfb46 "mm: page_alloc: embed OOM killing naturally into allocation slowpath". Did you apply that commit with agreement to let GFP_NOIO / GFP_NOFS allocations fail upon memory pressure and permit filesystems to take fs error actions? /* The OOM killer does not compensate for light reclaim */ if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_FS)) goto out; -- 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>