On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 04:40:43PM -0500, Neil Horman wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 12:16:39PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Neil Horman <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 09, 2005 at 04:29:01PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > Neil Horman <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hey all-
> > > > > I was recently shown this issue, wherein, if the kernel was kept full of
> > > > > pagecache via applications that were constantly writing large amounts of data to
> > > > > disk, the box could find itself in a position where the vm, in __alloc_pages
> > > > > would invoke the oom killer repetatively within try_to_free_pages, until such
> > > > > time as the box had no candidate processes left to kill, at which point it would
> > > > > panic.
> > > >
> > > > That's pretty bad. Are you able to provide a description which would permit
> > > > others to reproduce this?
> > >
> > > As promised, heres the reproducer that was given to me, and used to reproduce
> > > this problem:
> > >
> > > 1) setup an nfs serve with a thread count of 2. Of course, 1 thread might make
> > > the problem more easy to reproduce. I haven't tried it yet.
> > >
> > > 2) Setup 4 nodes to hammer the nfs mounted directory. The 4 nodes should hammer
> > > out 4 gigs. 2 gigs didn't seem to be enough.
> > >
> > > I used a locally developed tool called ior to reproduce this problem. The tool
> > > can be found here:
> > >
> > > http://www.llnl.gov/asci/platforms/purple/rfp/benchmarks/limited/ior/
> > >
> > > I suppose anything that can write to NFS fast should be fine. But that's what I
> > > did.
> > >
> > >
> > > If you do this, any node writing to the server that has more than 4GB of RAM
> > > should start oom killing to the point where it runs out of candidate processes
> > > and panics
> >
> > We merged an NFS fix last week which will help throttling under heavy
> > writeout conditions..
> This one?
> http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=bb713d6d38f7be4f4e7d790cddb1b076e7da6699
> I guess I must have just missed it during my testing. I'll give it a spin and
> let you know if it fixes my test case.
>
> Thanks & Regards
> Neil
>
> > -
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> > the body of a message to [email protected]
> > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
> --
> /***************************************************
> *Neil Horman
> *Software Engineer
> *gpg keyid: 1024D / 0x92A74FA1 - http://pgp.mit.edu
> ***************************************************/
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Just finished testing with the latest kernel, and the problem appears to be
gone. I withdraw my patch. Apologies for the noise.
Thanks & Regards
Neil
--
/***************************************************
*Neil Horman
*Software Engineer
*gpg keyid: 1024D / 0x92A74FA1 - http://pgp.mit.edu
***************************************************/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
