From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754963Ab3AYBsN (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jan 2013 20:48:13 -0500 Received: from talus.maths.usyd.edu.au ([129.78.68.1]:44988 "EHLO talus.maths.usyd.edu.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753095Ab3AYBsF (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jan 2013 20:48:05 -0500 X-smtpdoor-from: psz@maths.usyd.edu.au X-smtpdoor-want-Message-ID: <201301250147.r0P1l00t001070@como.maths.usyd.edu.au> Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 12:47:00 +1100 From: paul.szabo@sydney.edu.au Message-Id: <201301250147.r0P1l00t001070@como.maths.usyd.edu.au> To: fengguang.wu@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Negative (setpoint-dirty) in bdi_position_ratio() Cc: 695182@bugs.debian.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, jack@suse.cz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org In-Reply-To: <20130125005529.GA21668@localhost> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Dear Fengguang, > There are 260MB reclaimable slab pages in the normal zone ... Marked "all_unreclaimable? yes": is that wrong? Question asked also in: http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=135873981326767&w=2 > ... however we somehow failed to reclaim them. ... I made a patch that would do a drop_caches at that point, please see: http://bugs.debian.org/695182 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=101;filename=drop_caches.patch;att=1;bug=695182 http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=135785511125549&w=2 and that successfully avoided OOM when writing files. But, the drop_caches patch did not protect against the "sleep test". > ... What's your filesystem and the content of /proc/slabinfo? Filesystem is EXT3. See output of slabinfo in Debian bug above or in http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=135796154427544&w=2 Thanks, Paul Paul Szabo psz@maths.usyd.edu.au http://www.maths.usyd.edu.au/u/psz/ School of Mathematics and Statistics University of Sydney Australia