Hi Michal,
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:34:50AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> Looks much better. Thanks! I am wondering whether we want to have this
> marked for stable. The patch is quite non-intrusive and fires only when
> we are really OOM. It is definitely better to try harder than go and
>
Hi Michal,
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:34:50AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> Looks much better. Thanks! I am wondering whether we want to have this
> marked for stable. The patch is quite non-intrusive and fires only when
> we are really OOM. It is definitely better to try harder than go and
>
Looks much better. Thanks! I am wondering whether we want to have this
marked for stable. The patch is quite non-intrusive and fires only when
we are really OOM. It is definitely better to try harder than go and
disrupt the system by the OOM killer. So I would add
Fixes: 0aaa29a56e4f ("mm,
Looks much better. Thanks! I am wondering whether we want to have this
marked for stable. The patch is quite non-intrusive and fires only when
we are really OOM. It is definitely better to try harder than go and
disrupt the system by the OOM killer. So I would add
Fixes: 0aaa29a56e4f ("mm,
I got OOM report from production team with v4.4 kernel.
It had enough free memory but failed to allocate GFP_KERNEL order-0
page and finally encountered OOM kill. It occured during QA process
which launches several apps, switching and so on. It happned rarely.
IOW, In normal situation, it was not
I got OOM report from production team with v4.4 kernel.
It had enough free memory but failed to allocate GFP_KERNEL order-0
page and finally encountered OOM kill. It occured during QA process
which launches several apps, switching and so on. It happned rarely.
IOW, In normal situation, it was not
6 matches
Mail list logo