Comment 69 for bug 1833281

(In reply to Jim Rees from comment #47)
> This bug is being discussed on lkml:
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/8/4/15
>
> I'm not going to participate there, but someone should point them to this
> bug and point out that everything worked fine until 4.10. Sometimes things
> that used to work and then got broken rate a higher priority.

I believe it is not relevant. They are discussing problem of memory allocation in general, that behaviour did not change much in recent kernels. But what we are discussing is a regression of using swap in kernels >= 4.10 (or >= 4.11?). In that thread topic starter suggests to swapoff, but what we are discussing is wise a versa not using an enabled swap.