Memory management issue on RPi?

[Michael Tuexen]

> On 12 Nov 2015, at 21:03, Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 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.
Any plans to commit it?

Best regards
Michael
> 
>> 
>> Let me know if you want me to do some more testing.
> 
> No, this is enough.
> Thank you.
>