[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081027062216.GH11948@disturbed>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 17:22:16 +1100
From: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
To: Claudio Martins <ctpm@....utl.pt>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Order 0 page allocation failure under heavy I/O load
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 06:47:31AM +0100, Claudio Martins wrote:
> On Sunday 26 October 2008, Dave Chinner wrote:
>
> > The host will hang for tens of seconds at a time with both CPU cores
> > pegged at 100%, and eventually I get this in dmesg:
> >
> > [1304740.261506] linux: page allocation failure. order:0, mode:0x10000
> > [1304740.261516] Pid: 10705, comm: linux Tainted: P 2.6.26-1-amd64
>
> Hello,
>
> Have you tried to increase vm.min_free_kbytes to something higher, that is
> >=30000?
No, because I've found the XFS bug the workload was triggering so
I don't need to run it anymore.
I reported the problem because it appears that we've reported an
allocation failure without very much reclaim scanning (64 pages in
DMA zone, 0 pages in DMA32 zone), and there is apparently pages
available for allocation in the DMA zone:
1304740.262136] Node 0 DMA: 160*4kB 82*8kB 32*16kB 11*32kB 8*64kB 4*128kB 3*256kB 0*512kB 0*1024kB 0*2048kB 1*4096kB = 8048kB
So it appears that memory reclaim has not found the free pages it
apparently has available....
Fundamentally, I/O from a single CPU to a single disk on a machine
with 2GB RAM should not be able to cause allocation failures at all,
especially when the I/O is pure data I/O to a single file. Something
in the default config is busted if I can do that, and that's why
I reported the bug.
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@...morbit.com
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists