linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.39-rc4+: oom-killer busy killing tasks

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 28 Apr 2011 08:16:29 +0900
From:	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>
To:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc:	Christian Kujau <lists@...dbynature.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, xfs@....sgi.com
Subject: Re: 2.6.39-rc4+: oom-killer busy killing tasks

On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 7:28 PM, Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 12:46:51AM -0700, Christian Kujau wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 at 12:26, Dave Chinner wrote:
>> > What this shows is that VFS inode cache memory usage increases until
>> > about the 550 sample mark before the VM starts to reclaim it with
>> > extreme prejudice. At that point, I'd expect the XFS inode cache to
>> > then shrink, and it doesn't. I've got no idea why the either the
>>
>> Do you remember any XFS changes past 2.6.38 that could be related to
>> something like this?
>
> There's plenty of changes that coul dbe the cause - we've changed
> the inode reclaim to run in the background out of a workqueue as
> well as via the shrinker, so it could even be workqueue starvation
> causing the the problem...

RCU free starvation is another possibility?
https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/4/25/124

-- 
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/