Re: OOM-killer too aggressive?

On Sun, Feb 26, 2006 at 10:21:52AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Chuck Ebbert <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Chris Largret is getting repeated OOM kills because of DMA memory
> > exhaustion:
> > 
> > oom-killer: gfp_mask=0xd1, order=3
> > 
> 
> This could be related to the known GFP_DMA oom on some x86_64 machines.

What known GFP_DMA oom? GFP_DMA allocation should work.

-Andi
-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: OOM-killer too aggressive?
    • From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>

• References:
  • OOM-killer too aggressive?
    • From: Chuck Ebbert <[email protected]>
  • Re: OOM-killer too aggressive?
    • From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: Fix mem= cmdline handling on arch/powerpc for !MULTIPLATFORM
• Next by Date: Re: Status of X86_P4_CLOCKMOD?
• Previous by thread: Re: OOM-killer too aggressive?
• Next by thread: Re: OOM-killer too aggressive?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]