On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 8:29 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 03-02-17 10:56:42, vinayak menon wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 9:31 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> >
>> > Why would you like to chose and kill a task when the slab reclaim can
>> > still make sufficient progres? Are you sure that the sla
On Fri 03-02-17 10:56:42, vinayak menon wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 9:31 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > Why would you like to chose and kill a task when the slab reclaim can
> > still make sufficient progres? Are you sure that the slab contribution
> > to the stats makes all the above happeni
On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 11:44:22AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 31-01-17 14:32:08, Vinayak Menon wrote:
> > During global reclaim, the nr_reclaimed passed to vmpressure
> > includes the pages reclaimed from slab. But the corresponding
> > scanned slab pages is not passed. This can cause tota
On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 9:31 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> Why would you like to chose and kill a task when the slab reclaim can
> still make sufficient progres? Are you sure that the slab contribution
> to the stats makes all the above happening?
>
I agree that a task need not be killed if sufficien
On Thu 02-02-17 21:00:10, vinayak menon wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Thu 02-02-17 16:55:49, vinayak menon wrote:
> >> On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >> > On Thu 02-02-17 11:44:22, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >> >> On Tue 31-01-17 14:32:08, V
On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 02-02-17 16:55:49, vinayak menon wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> > On Thu 02-02-17 11:44:22, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> >> On Tue 31-01-17 14:32:08, Vinayak Menon wrote:
>> >> > During global reclaim, the nr
On Thu 02-02-17 16:55:49, vinayak menon wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Thu 02-02-17 11:44:22, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >> On Tue 31-01-17 14:32:08, Vinayak Menon wrote:
> >> > During global reclaim, the nr_reclaimed passed to vmpressure
> >> > includes the pages r
On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> We usually refer to the culprit comment as
> Fixes: 6b4f7799c6a5 ("mm: vmscan: invoke slab shrinkers from shrink_zone()")
>
Thanks for pointing that out Michal. I see that added to the version
of patch in mmotm.
> To unsubscribe, send a mes
On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 02-02-17 11:44:22, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> On Tue 31-01-17 14:32:08, Vinayak Menon wrote:
>> > During global reclaim, the nr_reclaimed passed to vmpressure
>> > includes the pages reclaimed from slab. But the corresponding
>> > scanned sl
On Thu 02-02-17 11:44:22, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 31-01-17 14:32:08, Vinayak Menon wrote:
> > During global reclaim, the nr_reclaimed passed to vmpressure
> > includes the pages reclaimed from slab. But the corresponding
> > scanned slab pages is not passed. This can cause total reclaimed
> >
On Tue 31-01-17 14:32:08, Vinayak Menon wrote:
> During global reclaim, the nr_reclaimed passed to vmpressure
> includes the pages reclaimed from slab. But the corresponding
> scanned slab pages is not passed. This can cause total reclaimed
> pages to be greater than scanned, causing an unsigned un
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 02:32:08PM +0530, Vinayak Menon wrote:
> During global reclaim, the nr_reclaimed passed to vmpressure
> includes the pages reclaimed from slab. But the corresponding
> scanned slab pages is not passed. This can cause total reclaimed
> pages to be greater than scanned, causin
During global reclaim, the nr_reclaimed passed to vmpressure
includes the pages reclaimed from slab. But the corresponding
scanned slab pages is not passed. This can cause total reclaimed
pages to be greater than scanned, causing an unsigned underflow
in vmpressure resulting in a critical event bei
13 matches
Mail list logo
