[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4E26EA93.5020302@parallels.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 18:47:47 +0400
From: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...allels.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm-slab: allocate kmem_cache with __GFP_REPEAT
Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Le mercredi 20 juillet 2011 à 18:32 +0400, Konstantin Khlebnikov a
> écrit :
>
>> I catch this on our rhel6-openvz kernel, and yes it very patchy,
>> but I don't see any reasons why this cannot be reproduced on mainline kernel.
>>
>> there was abount ten containers with random stuff, node already do intensive swapout but still alive,
>> in this situation starting new containers sometimes (1 per 1000) fails due to kmem_cache_create failures in nf_conntrack,
>> there no other messages except:
>> Unable to create nf_conn slab cache
>> and some
>> nf_conntrack: falling back to vmalloc.
>> (it try allocates huge hash table and do it via vmalloc if kmalloc fails)
>
>
> Does this kernel contain commit 6d4831c2 ?
> (vfs: avoid large kmalloc()s for the fdtable)
>
yes, but not exactly, in our kerner it looks like:
static inline void * alloc_fdmem(unsigned int size)
{
if (size <= PAGE_SIZE)
return kmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
else
return vmalloc(size);
}
and looks like this change is came from ancient times =)
--
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