From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from d23relay03.au.ibm.com (d23relay03.au.ibm.com [202.81.18.234]) by e23smtp02.au.ibm.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id lBF3qpxx021037 for ; Sat, 15 Dec 2007 14:52:51 +1100 Received: from d23av03.au.ibm.com (d23av03.au.ibm.com [9.190.234.97]) by d23relay03.au.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.7) with ESMTP id lBF3qdRS3752102 for ; Sat, 15 Dec 2007 14:52:39 +1100 Received: from d23av03.au.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d23av03.au.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id lBF3qLlN020694 for ; Sat, 15 Dec 2007 14:52:22 +1100 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 09:22:00 +0530 From: Dhaval Giani Subject: Re: 2.6.22-stable causes oomkiller to be invoked Message-ID: <20071215035200.GA22082@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: Dhaval Giani References: <20071213162936.GA7635@suse.de> <20071213164658.GA30865@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20071213175423.GA2977@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <476295FF.1040202@gmail.com> <20071214154711.GD23670@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4762A721.7080400@gmail.com> <20071214161637.GA2687@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20071214095023.b5327703.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20071214182802.GC2576@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20071214150533.aa30efd4.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071214150533.aa30efd4.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrew Morton Cc: htejun@gmail.com, gregkh@suse.de, stable@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, maneesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com, vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com, balbir@in.ibm.com, ego@in.ibm.com, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: > Is it really the case that the bug only turns up when you run tests like > > while echo; do cat /sys/kernel/kexec_crash_loaded; done > and > while echo; do cat /sys/kernel/uevent_seqnum ; done; > > or will any fork-intensive workload also do it? Say, > > while echo ; do true ; done > This does not leak, but having a simple text file and reading it in a loop causes it. > ? > > Another interesting factoid here is that after the oomkilling you slabinfo has > > mm_struct 38 98 584 7 1 : tunables 32 16 8 : slabdata 14 14 0 : globalstat 2781 196 49 31 0 1 0 0 0 : cpustat 368800 11864 368920 11721 > > so we aren't leaking mm_structs. In fact we aren't leaking anything from > slab. But we are leaking pgds. > > iirc the most recent change we've made in the pgd_t area is the quicklist > management which went into 2.6.22-rc1. You say the bug was present in > 2.6.22. Can you test 2.6.21? Nope, leak is not present in 2.6.21.7 -- regards, Dhaval -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org