Re: __alloc_pages: 0-order allocation failed

[Marcelo Tosatti]

On Wed, 26 Sep 2001, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 09:38:24AM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > --- linux.orig/mm/vmscan.c	Mon Sep 24 10:36:40 2001
> > +++ linux/mm/vmscan.c	Mon Sep 24 10:54:01 2001
> > @@ -567,6 +567,9 @@
> >  		if (nr_pages <= 0)
> >  			return 1;
> >  
> > +		if (nr_pages < SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX)
> > +			ret |= 1;
> > +
> 
> too much permissive (vm-tweaks-1 does something similar but not that
> permissive)

Andrea,

Does vm-tweaks-1 fixes the current problem we're seeing? 

Also, we have to make sure _all_ progress accounting is being done
correctly (i/dcache, etc). I'll make sure that happens as soon as the OOM
problem is gone.

> >  		ret |= swap_out(priority, classzone, gfp_mask, SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX << 2);
> >  	} while (--priority);
> >  
> > --- linux.orig/mm/page_alloc.c	Mon Sep 24 10:36:40 2001
> > +++ linux/mm/page_alloc.c	Mon Sep 24 10:44:12 2001
> > @@ -400,7 +400,7 @@
> >  			if (!z)
> >  				break;
> >  
> > -			if (zone_free_pages(z, order) > z->pages_high) {
> > +			if (zone_free_pages(z, order) > z->pages_min) {
> 
> that breaks oom detection.

Why?