linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.34-rc3: simple du (on a big xfs tree) triggers oom killer

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20100405230600.GA3335@dastard>
Date:	Tue, 6 Apr 2010 09:06:00 +1000
From:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
To:	Hans-Peter Jansen <hpj@...la.net>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, opensuse-kernel@...nsuse.org,
	xfs@....sgi.com
Subject: Re: 2.6.34-rc3: simple du (on a big xfs tree) triggers oom killer

On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 01:35:41PM +0200, Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:
> On Monday 05 April 2010, 02:49:06 Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 12:49:17AM +0200, Hans-Peter Jansen wrote:
> > > [Sorry for the cross post, but I don't know where to start to tackle this 
> > >  issue]
> > > 
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > on an attempt to get to a current kernel, I suffer from an issue, where a 
> > > simple du on a reasonably big xfs tree leads to invoking the oom killer: 
> > 
> > How big is the directory tree (how many inodes, etc)?
> 
> It's 1.1 TB system backup tree, let's say: many..

1.1TB isn't big anymore. ;)

> > > Apr  4 23:26:02 tyrex kernel: [  488.161105] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0 0
> > > Apr  4 23:26:02 tyrex kernel: [  488.161107] DMA: 18*4kB 53*8kB 31*16kB 20*32kB 14*64kB 8*128kB 0*256kB 0*512kB 0*1024kB 0*2048kB 0*4096kB = 3552kB
> > > Apr  4 23:26:02 tyrex kernel: [  488.161112] Normal: 32*4kB 1*8kB 1*16kB 1*32kB 1*64kB 1*128kB 1*256kB 0*512kB 1*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 3704kB
> > > Apr  4 23:26:02 tyrex kernel: [  488.161117] HighMem: 17*4kB 29*8kB 47*16kB 16*32kB 6*64kB 30*128kB 53*256kB 27*512kB 14*1024kB 7*2048kB 377*4096kB = 1606044kB
> > > Apr  4 23:26:02 tyrex kernel: [  488.161122] 29947 total pagecache pages
> > > Apr  4 23:26:02 tyrex kernel: [  488.161123] 0 pages in swap cache
> > > Apr  4 23:26:02 tyrex kernel: [  488.161124] Swap cache stats: add 0, delete 0, find 0/0
> > > Apr  4 23:26:02 tyrex kernel: [  488.161125] Free swap  = 2104476kB
> > > Apr  4 23:26:02 tyrex kernel: [  488.161126] Total swap = 2104476kB
> > > Apr  4 23:26:02 tyrex kernel: [  488.165523] 784224 pages RAM
> > > Apr  4 23:26:02 tyrex kernel: [  488.165524] 556914 pages HighMem
> > > Apr  4 23:26:02 tyrex kernel: [  488.165525] 12060 pages reserved
> > > Apr  4 23:26:02 tyrex kernel: [  488.165526] 82604 pages shared
> > > Apr  4 23:26:02 tyrex kernel: [  488.165527] 328045 pages non-shared
> > > Apr  4 23:26:02 tyrex kernel: [  488.165529] Out of memory: kill process 4788 (mysqld-max) score 326208 or a child
> > > Apr  4 23:26:02 tyrex kernel: [  488.165531] Killed process 4788 (mysqld-max) vsz:1304832kB, anon-rss:121428kB, file-rss:4336kB
> > > [...]
> > 
> > Oh, this is a highmem box. You ran out of low memory, I think, which
> > is where all the inodes are cached. Seems like a VM problem or a
> > highmem/lowmem split config problem to me, not anything to do with
> > XFS...
> 
> Might be, I don't have a chance to test this on a different FS. Thanks
> for the answer anyway, Dave. I hope, you don't mind, that I keep you 
> copied on this thread.. 
> 
> This matter is, I cannot locate the problem from the syslog output. Might
> be a "can't see the forest because all the trees" syndrome.

Well, I have to ask why you are running a 32bit PAE kernel when your
CPU is:

<6>[    0.085062] CPU0: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU           X3460  @ 2.80GHz stepping 05

64bit capable.  Use a 64 bit kernel and this problem should go away.

> It's hard to believe, that a current kernel on a current system with 12 GB, 
> even if using the insane pae on i586 is not able to cope with an du on a 
> 1.1 TB file tree. Since du is invokable by users, this creates a pretty 
> ugly DOS attack for local users.

Agreed. And FWIW, don't let your filesystems get near ENOSPC on
2.6.34-rc, either....

(i.e. under sustained write load, 2.6.34-rc will hit the OOM killer
on page cache allocation before the filesystem can report ENOSPC to
the user application.  Test 224 in the xfsqa suite on a VM w/ 1GB
RAM will trigger this with > 90% reliability....)

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/