Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: 4.8.8 kernel trigger OOM killer repeatedly when I have lots of RAM that should be free | From | Vlastimil Babka <> | Date | Mon, 28 Nov 2016 09:06:58 +0100 |
| |
On 11/22/2016 10:46 PM, Simon Kirby wrote: > On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 05:14:02PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > >> On 11/22/2016 05:06 PM, Marc MERLIN wrote: >>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 01:56:39PM -0800, Marc MERLIN wrote: >>>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 10:50:20PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote: >>>>>> 4.9rc5 however seems to be doing better, and is still running after 18 >>>>>> hours. However, I got a few page allocation failures as per below, but the >>>>>> system seems to recover. >>>>>> Vlastimil, do you want me to continue the copy on 4.9 (may take 3-5 days) >>>>>> or is that good enough, and i should go back to 4.8.8 with that patch applied? >>>>>> https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=147423605024993 >>>>> >>>>> Hi, I think it's enough for 4.9 for now and I would appreciate trying >>>>> 4.8 with that patch, yeah. >>>> >>>> So the good news is that it's been running for almost 5H and so far so good. >>> >>> And the better news is that the copy is still going strong, 4.4TB and >>> going. So 4.8.8 is fixed with that one single patch as far as I'm >>> concerned. >>> >>> So thanks for that, looks good to me to merge. >> >> Thanks a lot for the testing. So what do we do now about 4.8? (4.7 is >> already EOL AFAICS). >> >> - send the patch [1] as 4.8-only stable. Greg won't like that, I expect. >> - alternatively a simpler (againm 4.8-only) patch that just outright >> prevents OOM for 0 < order < costly, as Michal already suggested. >> - backport 10+ compaction patches to 4.8 stable >> - something else? >> >> Michal? Linus? >> >> [1] https://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=147423605024993 > > Sorry for my molasses rate of feedback. I found a workaround, setting > vm/watermark_scale_factor to 500, and threw that in sysctl. This was on > the MythTV box that OOMs everything after about a day on 4.8 otherwise. > > I've been running [1] for 9 days on it (4.8.4 + [1]) without issue, but > just realized I forgot to remove the watermark_scale_factor workaround. > I've restored that now, so I'll see if it becomes unhappy by tomorrow.
Thanks for the testing. Could you now try Michal's stable candidate [1] from this thread please?
[1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=147988285831283&w=2
> I also threw up a few other things you had asked for (vmstat, zoneinfo > before and after the first OOM on 4.8.4): http://0x.ca/sim/ref/4.8.4/ > (that was before booting into a rebuild with [1] applied) > > Simon- >
| |