Re: [PATCH 10/11] mm, oom: protect !costly allocations some more

2016-04-11 Thread Vlastimil Babka
On 04/05/2016 01:25 PM, Michal Hocko wrote: From: Michal Hocko should_reclaim_retry will give up retries for higher order allocations if none of the eligible zones has any requested or higher order pages available even if we pass the watermak check for order-0. This is done because there is no

Re: [PATCH 10/11] mm, oom: protect !costly allocations some more

2016-04-06 Thread Michal Hocko
On Tue 05-04-16 17:06:12, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 5 Apr 2016 13:25:32 +0200 Michal Hocko wrote: > > > From: Michal Hocko > > > > should_reclaim_retry will give up retries for higher order allocations > > if none of the eligible zones has any requested or higher order pages > > available

Re: [PATCH 10/11] mm, oom: protect !costly allocations some more

2016-04-05 Thread Andrew Morton
On Tue, 5 Apr 2016 13:25:32 +0200 Michal Hocko wrote: > From: Michal Hocko > > should_reclaim_retry will give up retries for higher order allocations > if none of the eligible zones has any requested or higher order pages > available even if we pass the watermak check for order-0. This is done

[PATCH 10/11] mm, oom: protect !costly allocations some more

2016-04-05 Thread Michal Hocko
From: Michal Hocko should_reclaim_retry will give up retries for higher order allocations if none of the eligible zones has any requested or higher order pages available even if we pass the watermak check for order-0. This is done because there is no guarantee that the reclaimable and currently f