[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130107003718.GA1336@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 19:37:18 -0500
From: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: oops in copy_page_rep()
On Sat, Jan 05, 2013 at 07:57:39PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Adding more people in case somebody else has any idea. Anybody?
>
> On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 7:22 AM, Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com> wrote:
> > I have no idea what happened here, but this is the first time I've seen this one.
> > This was running a tree pulled yesterday afternoon.
> >
> > BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at ffff880100201000
>
> This is %rsi, which is the source for the page copy:
>
> copy_user_highpage()->
> copy_user_page()->
> copy_page()->
> copy_page_rep
>
> I don't know exactly which copy_user_highpage() case this is from, the
> call trace implies this *could* be a hugepage, and those functions do
> copy pages individually in a loop too.
investigating the huge page theory a little further I'm a bit confused.
The kernel on that machine has THP enabled, and the cpu supports it (an old amd64), but..
$ cat /sys/kernel/mm/hugepages/hugepages-2048kB/*
0
0
0
0
0
0
I was expecting at least one of those to be non-zero.
/sys/kernel/mm/transparent_hugepage/khugepaged/full_scans and pages_collapsed
are both non-zero, so it's been busy doing _something_.
Is this expected behaviour ?
Dave
--
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