[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1239737619.32604.118.camel@nimitz>
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 12:33:39 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Eric B Munson <ebmunson@...ibm.com>,
Mel Gorman <mel@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: meminfo Committed_AS underflows
I have a set of ppc64 machines that seem to spontaneously get underflows
in /proc/meminfo's Committed_AS field:
# while true; do cat /proc/meminfo | grep _AS; sleep 1; done | uniq -c
1 Committed_AS: 18446744073709323392 kB
11 Committed_AS: 18446744073709455488 kB
6 Committed_AS: 35136 kB
5 Committed_AS: 18446744073709454400 kB
7 Committed_AS: 35904 kB
3 Committed_AS: 18446744073709453248 kB
2 Committed_AS: 34752 kB
9 Committed_AS: 18446744073709453248 kB
8 Committed_AS: 34752 kB
3 Committed_AS: 18446744073709320960 kB
7 Committed_AS: 18446744073709454080 kB
3 Committed_AS: 18446744073709320960 kB
5 Committed_AS: 18446744073709454080 kB
6 Committed_AS: 18446744073709320960 kB
As you can see, it bounces in and out of it. I think the problem is
here:
#define ACCT_THRESHOLD max(16, NR_CPUS * 2)
...
void vm_acct_memory(long pages)
{
long *local;
preempt_disable();
local = &__get_cpu_var(committed_space);
*local += pages;
if (*local > ACCT_THRESHOLD || *local < -ACCT_THRESHOLD) {
atomic_long_add(*local, &vm_committed_space);
*local = 0;
}
preempt_enable();
}
Plus, some joker set CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1024.
nr_cpus (1024) * 2 * page_size (64k) = 128MB. That means each cpu can
skew the counter by 128MB. With 1024 CPUs that means that we can have
~128GB of outstanding percpu accounting that meminfo doesn't see. Let's
say we do vm_acct_memory(128MB-1) on 1023 of the CPUs, then on the other
CPU, we do vm_acct_memory(-128GB).
The 1023 cpus won't ever hit the ACCT_THRESHOLD. The 1 CPU that did
will decrement the global 'vm_committed_space' by ~128 GB. Underflow.
Yay. This happens on a much smaller scale now.
Should we be protecting meminfo so that it spits slightly more sane
numbers out to the user?
-- Dave
--
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