linux-kernel - Re: OOM with hackbench against next 0708

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4A56E7F9.9030405@in.ibm.com>
Date:	Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:34:25 +0530
From:	Sachin Sant <sachinp@...ibm.com>
To:	Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: OOM with hackbench against next 0708

Dave Hansen wrote:
> This doesn't look like a kernel bug at all to me.  You're out of memory,
> out of swap, and the thing that got killed was the thing allocating
> memory.  You're also down to 65MB of pagecache, which is awfully low for
> a 6GB machine.  That tells me it's also been effective in reclaiming
> disk cache.
>
> There are a couple of possibilities:
> 1. hackbench is broken, allocating too much memory and ooming, or it
>    has been misconfigured by a user
> 2. hackbench broke because something the kernel is telling it is wrong
> 3. The kernel is leaking (or just plain using) some memory more than a
>    few releases ago, and that caused the oom.
>
> I'd go back and carefully examine how hackbench is being run and that it
> is consistent.  You should also double-check your finding that the
> several-day-old -next isn't seeing this issue.
>   
Thanks Dave for the pointers.

I am able to consistently recreate this issue with next 0708. hackbench
creates 3600 tasks in my case. After starting the tests machine becomes
unresponsive and i finally have to reboot it.

The test ran successfully on next03, but unfortunately i did
not save the config file for that run. If i use the config file from
0708 and compile a 0703, the machine becomes unresponsive because
of OOM's. I can't explain why the test ran successfully against
0703 :-( in previous attempt.

Only data point i have at this time is the same tests runs successfully
against 2.6.31-rc2. But may be that's not even an argument :-)

Thanks
-Sachin



-- 

---------------------------------
Sachin Sant
IBM Linux Technology Center
India Systems and Technology Labs
Bangalore, India
---------------------------------

--
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/