From owner-freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Tue Jul 31 17:52:04 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arm@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFFF41060124 for ; Tue, 31 Jul 2018 17:52:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marklmi@yahoo.com) Received: from sonic302-22.consmr.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (sonic302-22.consmr.mail.gq1.yahoo.com [98.137.68.148]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4722B74753 for ; Tue, 31 Jul 2018 17:52:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marklmi@yahoo.com) X-YMail-OSG: 3jjNQFEVM1mREEZO70heCF7tyhyt5Dsf9ppbyoIJUuZqHiOnYvxo.hFxVwn2HNk iDX1MYfzy131SS74EaM8g7VnqKLp6E6Cs.LdIvP0PHu0E_jSNcka4whYPmVyb0ItJrzK7V2Oec0R BUHf_dqCmVmyoAloBOpmpmUzxTv1B9Wd.dMQ2MI8Dq3MKLFnjhY0anyZYUzGiYJ0cNmrPbv7Erc6 6v6PDOxlkV5sAtPSf.M6tdybNx.NF8dClPLvbNgG68zvoVeI3ceTKZYmWHK6sVyJ88oiREpf_u6z gAZdDXFoRZ6vjY4ANqxVZnPYphBsaMSG4PzSSccgqZbI1C_Ovt4lcmWP4dqBCtxu92PEmka19zvc 1sbUruSueJcTy.Gf7gosKR54Hdy_osfv1R12UX5AwErJIFPkcyd9_QYVeHkpvqys7khkXjWn8jHc 5vzfcJ8FW7sBOfmb_PAJuFe0QM.wGcyWKtQhpjattJ0Tcjcl8dbAmkB8c_OR3tTJTnGTqOXAV30H 49Xb2djzPobmJuyZuqu3P2uHDB9rXkIi5.TMFDnbQwk3G58_uyb0xFaFCr13gIQTChHvxvoK_8P6 qj_hKa1r4mXYwuFWBC2fERED_ykidMqANvn5DdCBP68DNSqx7tD_v3qXPupLypKqOMgoYRF6Sdow 9z1hlweuBKYzMcwBWRo22Q6WkSU3hzbMdBMm28ugCxSSndrgxZTKThBG_sIcKZgkecZVOvElyiZ6 OGugM.HCOSz.rWRKq4ip1vNHhf.RqqzeM6C2uSz0ILm41peM4.aQ6vxB9wLYjOA8WOgRNu2gIamU OreNk4QBthzXCjqb2FD84mcvOaXNSpnQRY.nvrZJUfZNCDteQjT1INo36JkRp3E2j8oQPRtlfYY7 .U0ehxDunJNdKU87uiw1vS34RNn1mGm2s4UokjP.hHKTw6BQPSNE59AwIbYkPZCWQUw1b2aSvFgw qBEbjrQMTar52KdSZEUFYvPF2e7omIj1oygZWv1f4N7DGj9HtYZSx8RB_WmVuVR2OgrCHmMD3rdi vPwsR0r7f Received: from sonic.gate.mail.ne1.yahoo.com by sonic302.consmr.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with HTTP; Tue, 31 Jul 2018 17:51:56 +0000 Received: from ip70-189-131-151.lv.lv.cox.net (EHLO [192.168.0.105]) ([70.189.131.151]) by smtp411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (Oath Hermes SMTP Server) with ESMTPA ID ac671155936c34d194286ae9d6da3f75; Tue, 31 Jul 2018 17:51:52 +0000 (UTC) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) Subject: Re: RPI3 swap experiments From: Mark Millard In-Reply-To: <20180731153531.GA94742@www.zefox.net> Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2018 10:51:51 -0700 Cc: Trev , freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <908FB299-07CF-4E88-9C18-298CA357AD01@yahoo.com> References: <20180723063526.GA45726@www.zefox.net> <20180723155311.GB45726@www.zefox.net> <4ED9B658-A5A8-4BA6-9412-EBB7150B4B66@yahoo.com> <20180723190257.GA47869@www.zefox.net> <76BCFCB9-1071-4557-9FDE-017444ADBF42@yahoo.com> <20180725232453.GA57716@www.zefox.net> <20180731054712.GA92917@www.zefox.net> <20180731153531.GA94742@www.zefox.net> To: bob prohaska X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) X-BeenThere: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: "Porting FreeBSD to ARM processors." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2018 17:52:05 -0000 On 2018-Jul-31, at 8:35 AM, bob prohaska wrote: > On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 10:31:33PM +1000, Trev wrote: >> bob prohaska wrote on 31/07/2018 15:47: >>=20 >>> It would be most interesting to see what happens if OOMA >>> could be turned off. Is that possible? >>=20 >> Possibly, but you might find you're treating the symptom(s) rather = than=20 >> the cause(s) ... something must be triggering the condition whether=20= >> correctly or not. >=20 > That's my point. To determine if OOMA is triggered correctly or not. = I'm starting > to think not. >=20 > The reason is the dependency on swap layout (mixed USB/microSD vs all = one or the > other) and the fact that OOMA kills don't seem to coincide with = periods of=20 > maximum storage read/write delay, which is the conventional = explanation for > why OOMA kills happen in the first place. If turning off OOMA allows = buildworld > to complete successfully it suggests OOMA isn't correctly implemented.=20= Your rpi2 report said: > In this particular case all swap is on USB, in a single > 2 GB partition. which for that example indicates that swap layout being split was not involved. (But there is the potential too-large issue.) Have you had other examples of non-split swap layout getting OOMA kills? If yes, what types of contexts? [Especially any that do not have observed huge latencies or to evidence of device failures (retries required).] Any on rpi3? Any others on rpi2? As for swap use, do you have any tmpfs or other files systems that are memory based that also use swap if they grow too big (and are configured to allow such growth)? =3D=3D=3D Mark Millard marklmi at yahoo.com ( dsl-only.net went away in early 2018-Mar)