On ons, 2007-09-05 at 05:45 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 03:28:07 +0200 Ian Kumlien <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I have just had a quite unexpected 'low memory situation'... > > > > This is a AMD64 machine with 2 gig memory, running 64 bit userland. > > > > Kernel: 2.6.23-rc3-git10, updating to -rc5-* as soon as i can. > > I'm using SLUB:s > > > > > > To me, this looks odd... I thought that any cached memory would be > > reclamed but it was always full. > > > > Ideas? > > > > One example from dmesg: > > swapper: page allocation failure. order:1, mode:0x4020 > > > > Call Trace: > > <IRQ> [<ffffffff8026c7ef>] __alloc_pages+0x30f/0x330 > > [<ffffffff8028a0a1>] __slab_alloc+0x141/0x590 > > [<ffffffff805a5937>] __netdev_alloc_skb+0x17/0x40 > > [<ffffffff805a5937>] __netdev_alloc_skb+0x17/0x40 > > [<ffffffff8028b470>] __kmalloc_track_caller+0xa0/0xc0 > > [<ffffffff805a4b3f>] __alloc_skb+0x6f/0x150 > > [<ffffffff805a5937>] __netdev_alloc_skb+0x17/0x40 > > [<ffffffff88010945>] :sky2:sky2_rx_alloc+0x25/0xf0 > > [<ffffffff88013b0c>] :sky2:sky2_poll+0x6dc/0xcf0 > > [<ffffffff805e5f60>] tcp_delack_timer+0x0/0x210 > > [<ffffffff805ac38a>] net_rx_action+0x8a/0x140 > > [<ffffffff80242ac9>] __do_softirq+0x69/0xe0 > > [<ffffffff8020cd9c>] call_softirq+0x1c/0x30 > > [<ffffffff8020eb75>] do_softirq+0x35/0x90 > > [<ffffffff8020ede0>] do_IRQ+0x80/0x100 > > [<ffffffff8020ad00>] default_idle+0x0/0x40 > > [<ffffffff8020c121>] ret_from_intr+0x0/0xa > > <EOI> [<ffffffff8020ad29>] default_idle+0x29/0x40 > > [<ffffffff8020ade1>] cpu_idle+0xa1/0xf0 > > > > An order-1 GFP_ATOMIC allocation can fail, and networking should recover > from it. Well, this isn't only networking, It started with all the apps running and ended up with a pretty basic desktop with almost nothing running... (due to continued freezes that caused me to shut down more and more programs) > If this is happening a lot then someting might have been broken. Do you > have reason to believe that the frequency of this happening has inreased? I have never, to my knowledge, had this happen before... I just happened to start a few downloads with rtorrent and watched the machine slow down to a crawl... All this with over a gig in cache. The machine was actually deadlocked for almost a minute at one time. Top memory usage: PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 2395 pomac 20 0 440m 289m 238m S 2 14.4 32:56.54 rtorrent 21647 root 20 0 203m 120m 10m S 1 6.0 569:45.31 X 2351 pomac 20 0 170m 111m 53m S 0 5.5 15:43.66 rtorrent At peak time, one of the rtorrent processes consumed more, but i still had 1.x gig as cache, which imho should have been reclaimed. vmstat now: procs -----------memory---------- ---swap-- -----io---- -system-- ----cpu---- r b swpd free buff cache si so bi bo in cs us sy id wa 0 0 365204 16628 30644 1445316 2 1 362 92 18 21 4 2 91 3 PS. I have a dmesg dump from the incident, it's not long enough to contain all but it could be seen as a snapshot... DS. -- Ian Kumlien <pomac () vapor ! com> -- http://pomac.netswarm.net
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- References:
- Cache not being reclaimed?
- From: Ian Kumlien <[email protected]>
- Re: Cache not being reclaimed?
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Cache not being reclaimed?
- Prev by Date: [ANNOUNCE] DeskOpt 005 (completely unfair scheduling ;))
- Next by Date: [PATCH] local_t protection (critical section)
- Previous by thread: Re: Cache not being reclaimed?
- Next by thread: [ANNOUNCE] Lguest64 - fatter puppies!
- Index(es):
 |