Memory management issue on RPi?

[Konstantin Belousov]

On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 08:47:29PM +0100, Michael Tuexen wrote:
> > On 12 Nov 2015, at 19:09, Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel at gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 06:57:03PM +0100, Michael Tuexen wrote:
> >>> On 12 Nov 2015, at 18:12, Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 05:25:37PM +0100, Michael Tuexen wrote:
> >>>>> On 12 Nov 2015, at 13:18, Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> This is a known problem with the swap-less OOM.  The following patch
> >>>>> should give you an immediate relief.  You might want to tweak
> >>>>> sysctl vm.pageout_oom_seq if default value is not right, it was selected
> >>>>> by 'try and see' approach on very small (32 or 64MB) i386 VM.
> >>>> It just works... Will do some more testing...
> >>> 
> >>> I am more interested in report if OOM was triggered when it should.
> >> How do I know? What output do you want to see?
> >> 
> >> Best regards
> >> Michael
> >>> 
> >>> Try running several instances of 'sort /dev/zero'.
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I already answered this.
> > Run sort /dev/zero, and see whether OOM fires.
> OK, now I understand. You want to see if some processes are getting killed.
> (I was thinking that you might want to see some sysctl counters or so).
> 
> Results:
> * I'm able to compile/link/install a kernel from source. This was not
>   possible before.
> * When running three instances of sort /dev/zero, two of them get killed
>   after a while (less than a minute). One continued to run, but got also
>   kill eventually. All via ssh login.
Exactly, this is the experiment I want to occur, and even more, the results
are good.

> 
> Let me know if you want me to do some more testing.

No, this is enough.
Thank you.