[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1001271701170.17513@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 17:04:08 -0800 (PST)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To: Mark Lord <kernel@...savvy.com>
cc: Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>
Subject: Re: 2.6.32.5 regression: page allocation failure. order:1,
On Wed, 27 Jan 2010, Mark Lord wrote:
> > There was one bug related to MIGRATE_RESERVE that might be affecting
> > you. It reported as impacting swap-orientated workloads but it could
> > easily affect drivers that depend on high-order atomic allocations.
> > Unfortunately, the fix is not signed-off yet but I expect it to make its
> > way towards mainline when it is.
> >
> > Here is the patch with a slightly-altered changelog. Can you test if it
> > makes a difference please?
> ..
>
> We don't like to reboot our 24/7 server very often,
> and certainly not for debugging buggy kernels.
>
> It's rock solid again with 2.6.31.12 on it now.
>
Is there something specific about the workload that makes it easily
reproducible? Are you saying that 2.6.31.12 is "rock solid" because it
has survived a certain workload that caused these page allocation failures
with 2.6.32.5, or simply because it has a longer uptime and hasn't shown
a problem? It would be very helpful to describe the load so that we can
attempt to reproduce it locally without a sacrifice to your server.
--
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