From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757379AbcHWHkU (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Aug 2016 03:40:20 -0400 Received: from ud10.udmedia.de ([194.117.254.50]:54908 "EHLO mail.ud10.udmedia.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756859AbcHWHkT (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Aug 2016 03:40:19 -0400 Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 09:40:14 +0200 From: Markus Trippelsdorf To: Michal Hocko Cc: Joonsoo Kim , Andrew Morton , greg@suse.cz, Linus Torvalds , Arkadiusz Miskiewicz , Ralf-Peter Rohbeck , Jiri Slaby , Olaf Hering , Vlastimil Babka , linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML Subject: Re: OOM detection regressions since 4.7 Message-ID: <20160823074014.GB15849@x4> References: <20160822093249.GA14916@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20160823045245.GC17039@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE> <20160823073318.GA23577@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160823073318.GA23577@dhcp22.suse.cz> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2016.08.23 at 09:33 +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Tue 23-08-16 13:52:45, Joonsoo Kim wrote: > [...] > > Hello, Michal. > > > > I agree with partial revert but revert should be a different form. > > Below change try to reuse should_compact_retry() version for > > !CONFIG_COMPACTION but it turned out that it also causes regression in > > Markus report [1]. > > I would argue that CONFIG_COMPACTION=n behaves so arbitrary for high > order workloads that calling any change in that behavior a regression > is little bit exaggerated. Disabling compaction should have a very > strong reason. I haven't heard any so far. I am even wondering whether > there is a legitimate reason for that these days. BTW, the current config description: CONFIG_COMPACTION: Allows the compaction of memory for the allocation of huge pages. doesn't make it clear to the user that this is an essential feature. -- Markus