[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20120305120427.2d11d30e.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 12:04:27 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@...il.com>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: OOM killer even when not overcommiting
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 21:58:26 +0200
Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@...il.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> I assumed that when setting overcommit_memory=2 and
> overcommit_ratio<100 that the OOM killer won't ever get invoked (since
> we're not overcommiting memory), but it looks like I'm mistaken since
> apparently a simple mmap from userspace will trigger the OOM killer if
> it requests more memory than available.
>
> Is it how it's supposed to work? Why does it resort to OOM killing
> instead of just failing the allocation?
>
> Here is the dump I get when the OOM kicks in:
>
> ...
>
> [ 3108.730350] [<ffffffff81198e4a>] mlock_vma_pages_range+0x9a/0xa0
> [ 3108.734486] [<ffffffff8119b75b>] mmap_region+0x28b/0x510
> ...
The vma is mlocked for some reason - presumably the app is using
mlockall() or mlock()? So the kernel is trying to instantiate all the
pages at mmap() time.
--
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