[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1003101007410.1516-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:16:09 -0500 (EST)
From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To: Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
cc: Markus Rechberger <mrechberger@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Subject: Re: USBFS Memory allocation Bug
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 10:09:57PM +0100, Markus Rechberger wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I just stumbled around following issue:
> >
> > <SNIP to have one full message>
> >
> > [275835.491094] mediasrv: page allocation failure. order:6, mode:0x40d0
>
> This is massive. Why is usbdev_ioctl requiring an order-6 allocation?
> Does it have the option to fall back to vmalloc() for example?
We needed to implement an upper limit on the buffer size, and the value
chosen was sufficient for 8 ms of data. There is no fallback to
vmalloc().
Of course, the mediasrv program could always make multiple smaller
data submissions instead of a single big one.
> So, it's a high-order allocation but no swap is configured. As the
> system has a big mix of both anonymous and file memory, it is likely it
> was unable to find a large enough contiguous range of file-backed memory
> it could discard. There is pretty much nothing the memory manager could
> do here.
>
> FWIW, if swap was configured I'd think there was more the memory manager
> could have done.
>
> Is usb falling back to vmalloc() or order-0 pages possible?
No. It's not possible since the buffer has to be contiguous for DMA
purposes (this is a requirement of the driver interface).
Alan Stern
--
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