[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5061C8A2.1020605@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 10:07:14 -0500
From: Dave Kleikamp <dave.kleikamp@...cle.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
CC: Nico Schottelius <nico-kernel20120920@...ottelius.org>,
Arend van Spriel <arend@...adcom.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@...nel.org>,
jfs-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: Out of memory on 3.5 kernels
On 09/24/2012 05:43 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Sep 2012, Nico Schottelius wrote:
>
>> Active / Total Objects (% used) : 1165130 / 1198087 (97.2%)
>> Active / Total Slabs (% used) : 81027 / 81027 (100.0%)
>> Active / Total Caches (% used) : 69 / 101 (68.3%)
>> Active / Total Size (% used) : 1237249.81K / 1246521.94K (99.3%)
>> Minimum / Average / Maximum Object : 0.01K / 1.04K / 15.23K
>>
>> OBJS ACTIVE USE OBJ SIZE SLABS OBJ/SLAB CACHE SIZE NAME
>> 993607 993607 100% 1.21K 75358 26 2411456K jfs_ip
>
> Well that doesn't look good. 100% of the inode cache for jfs are being
> used which either means
>
> - there's a memory leak, or
maybe a missing iput() somewhere?
Nico, does unmounting the usb drive after killing the backup clean up
the jfs inode cache?
> - there's some sort of throttling issue in jfs.
>
> And those objects are consuming ~2.3GB of slab on your 4GB machine and
> seems to only have occurred between v3.4.2 to v3.5.3.
Almost nothing in jfs has changed between these releases. Only this:
vfs: Rename end_writeback() to clear_inode()
> It would be interesting to see what kmemleak would tell us.
>
> Adding Dave Kleikamp to the cc.
>
--
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