Le vendredi 11 mai 2007 à 18:38 +0100, Mel Gorman a écrit : > On (11/05/07 13:51), Nicolas Mailhot didst pronounce: > > Le vendredi 11 mai 2007 à 10:08 +0100, Mel Gorman a écrit : > > > > > > seems to have cured the system so far (need to charge it a bit longer to > > > > be sure) > > > > > > > > > > The longer it runs the better, particularly under load and after > > > updatedb has run. Thanks a lot for testing > > > > After a few hours of load testing still nothing in the logs, so the > > revert was probably the right thing to do > > Excellent. I am somewhat suprised by the result And you're probably right, it just banged after a day working fine 19:20:00 tar: page allocation failure. order:2, mode:0x84020 19:20:00 19:20:00 Call Trace: 19:20:00 [<ffffffff8025b5c3>] __alloc_pages+0x2aa/0x2c3 19:20:00 [<ffffffff802751f5>] __slab_alloc+0x196/0x586 19:20:00 [<ffffffff80300d79>] radix_tree_node_alloc+0x36/0x7e 19:20:00 [<ffffffff8027597a>] kmem_cache_alloc+0x32/0x4e 19:20:00 [<ffffffff80300d79>] radix_tree_node_alloc+0x36/0x7e 19:20:00 [<ffffffff8030118e>] radix_tree_insert+0x5d/0x18c 19:20:00 [<ffffffff80256ac4>] add_to_page_cache+0x3d/0x95 19:20:00 [<ffffffff80257aa4>] generic_file_buffered_write+0x222/0x7c8 19:20:00 [<ffffffff88013c74>] :jbd:do_get_write_access+0x506/0x53d 19:20:00 [<ffffffff8022c7d5>] current_fs_time+0x3b/0x40 19:20:00 [<ffffffff8025838c>] __generic_file_aio_write_nolock+0x342/0x3ac 19:20:00 [<ffffffff80416ac1>] __mutex_lock_slowpath+0x216/0x221 19:20:00 [<ffffffff80258457>] generic_file_aio_write+0x61/0xc1 19:20:00 [<ffffffff880271be>] :ext3:ext3_file_write+0x16/0x94 19:20:00 [<ffffffff8027938c>] do_sync_write+0xc9/0x10c 19:20:00 [<ffffffff80239c56>] autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x2e 19:20:00 [<ffffffff80279ba7>] vfs_write+0xce/0x177 19:20:00 [<ffffffff8027a16a>] sys_write+0x45/0x6e 19:20:00 [<ffffffff8020955c>] tracesys+0xdc/0xe1 19:20:00 19:20:00 Mem-info: 19:20:00 DMA per-cpu: 19:20:00 CPU 0: Hot: hi: 0, btch: 1 usd: 0 Cold: hi: 0, btch: 1 usd: 0 19:20:00 CPU 1: Hot: hi: 0, btch: 1 usd: 0 Cold: hi: 0, btch: 1 usd: 0 19:20:00 DMA32 per-cpu: 19:20:00 CPU 0: Hot: hi: 186, btch: 31 usd: 149 Cold: hi: 62, btch: 15 usd: 19 19:20:00 CPU 1: Hot: hi: 186, btch: 31 usd: 147 Cold: hi: 62, btch: 15 usd: 2 19:20:00 Active:348968 inactive:105561 dirty:23054 writeback:0 unstable:0 19:20:00 free:9776 slab:28092 mapped:23015 pagetables:10226 bounce:0 19:20:00 DMA free:7960kB min:20kB low:24kB high:28kB active:0kB inactive:0kB present:7648kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? yes 19:20:00 lowmem_reserve[]: 0 1988 1988 1988 19:20:00 DMA32 free:31144kB min:5692kB low:7112kB high:8536kB active:1395872kB inactive:422244kB present:2036004kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no 19:20:00 lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0 0 19:20:00 DMA: 6*4kB 6*8kB 7*16kB 3*32kB 8*64kB 8*128kB 6*256kB 1*512kB 0*1024kB 0*2048kB 1*4096kB = 7960kB 19:20:00 DMA32: 7560*4kB 0*8kB 8*16kB 0*32kB 1*64kB 1*128kB 0*256kB 1*512kB 0*1024kB 0*2048kB 0*4096kB = 31072kB 19:20:00 Swap cache: add 1527, delete 1521, find 216/286, race 397+0 19:20:00 Free swap = 4192824kB 19:20:00 Total swap = 4192944kB 19:20:00 Free swap: 4192824kB 19:20:00 524272 pages of RAM 19:20:00 14123 reserved pages 19:20:00 252562 pages shared 19:20:00 6 pages swap cached > so I'd like to look at the > alternative option with kswapd as well. Could you put that patch back in again > please and try the following patch instead? I'll try this one now (if it applies) Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [Bug 8464] New: autoreconf: page allocation failure. order:2, mode:0x84020
- From: Nicolas Mailhot <[email protected]>
- Re: [Bug 8464] New: autoreconf: page allocation failure. order:2, mode:0x84020
- References:
- Re: [Bug 8464] New: autoreconf: page allocation failure. order:2, mode:0x84020
- From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
- Re: [Bug 8464] New: autoreconf: page allocation failure. order:2, mode:0x84020
- From: [email protected] (Mel Gorman)
- Re: [Bug 8464] New: autoreconf: page allocation failure. order:2, mode:0x84020
- From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
- Re: [Bug 8464] New: autoreconf: page allocation failure. order:2, mode:0x84020
- From: [email protected] (Mel Gorman)
- Re: [Bug 8464] New: autoreconf: page allocation failure. order:2, mode:0x84020
- From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
- Re: [Bug 8464] New: autoreconf: page allocation failure. order:2, mode:0x84020
- From: [email protected] (Mel Gorman)
- Re: [Bug 8464] New: autoreconf: page allocation failure. order:2, mode:0x84020
- From: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
- Re: [Bug 8464] New: autoreconf: page allocation failure. order:2, mode:0x84020
- From: Nicolas Mailhot <[email protected]>
- Re: [Bug 8464] New: autoreconf: page allocation failure. order:2, mode:0x84020
- From: [email protected] (Mel Gorman)
- Re: [Bug 8464] New: autoreconf: page allocation failure. order:2, mode:0x84020
- From: Nicolas Mailhot <[email protected]>
- Re: [Bug 8464] New: autoreconf: page allocation failure. order:2, mode:0x84020
- From: [email protected] (Mel Gorman)
- Re: [Bug 8464] New: autoreconf: page allocation failure. order:2, mode:0x84020
- Prev by Date: Re: [Bug 8464] New: autoreconf: page allocation failure. order:2, mode:0x84020
- Next by Date: Re: [Bug 8464] New: autoreconf: page allocation failure. order:2, mode:0x84020
- Previous by thread: Re: [Bug 8464] New: autoreconf: page allocation failure. order:2, mode:0x84020
- Next by thread: Re: [Bug 8464] New: autoreconf: page allocation failure. order:2, mode:0x84020
- Index(es):