From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail203.messagelabs.com (mail203.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.243]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1B1A16B004D for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2009 00:52:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: by pxi15 with SMTP id 15so2282666pxi.23 for ; Tue, 18 Aug 2009 21:52:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 13:51:05 +0900 From: Minchan Kim Subject: Re: abnormal OOM killer message Message-Id: <20090819135105.e6b69a8d.minchan.kim@barrios-desktop> In-Reply-To: <4A8B7508.4040001@vflare.org> References: <18eba5a10908181841t145e4db1wc2daf90f7337aa6e@mail.gmail.com> <20090819114408.ab9c8a78.minchan.kim@barrios-desktop> <4A8B7508.4040001@vflare.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: ngupta@vflare.org Cc: Minchan Kim , =?UTF-8?B?7Jqw7Lap6riw?= , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, fengguang.wu@intel.com, riel@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, Mel Gorman List-ID: On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 09:14:08 +0530 Nitin Gupta wrote: > On 08/19/2009 08:14 AM, Minchan Kim wrote: > > On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 10:41:51 +0900 > > i??i?(C)e,? wrote: > > > >> Hi all~ > >> I have got a log message with OOM below. I don't know why this > >> phenomenon was happened. > >> When direct reclaim routine(try_to_free_pages) in __alloc_pages which > >> allocates kernel memory was failed, > >> one last chance is given to allocate memory before OOM routine is executed. > >> And that time, allocator uses ALLOC_WMARK_HIGH to limit watermark. > >> Then, zone_watermark_ok function test this value with current memory > >> state and decide 'can allocate' or 'cannot allocate'. > >> > >> Here is some kernel source code in __alloc_pages function to understand easily. > >> Kernel version is 2.6.18 for arm11. Memory size is 32Mbyte. And I use > >> compcache(0.5.2). > > > > >> > >> In my case, you can see free pages(6804KB) is much more higher than > >> high watermark value(1084KB) in OOM message. > >> And order of allocating is also zero.(order=0) > >> In buddy system, the number of 4kbyte page is 867. > >> So, I think OOM can't be happend. > >> > > > > Yes. I think so. > > > > In that case, even we can also avoid zone defensive algorithm. > > > >> How do you think about this? > >> Is this side effect of compcache? > > > > compcache can be storing lot of stale data and this memory space cannot be > reclaimed (unless overwritten by some other swap data). This is because stale data. It seems related ARMv6. I think Chungki's CPU is ARMv6. > compcache does not know when a swap slot has been freed and hence does not know > when its safe to free corresponding memory. You can check current memory usage > with /proc/ramzswap (see MemUsedTotal). > Let me have a question. Now the system has 79M as total swap. It's bigger than system memory size. Is it possible in compcache? Can we believe the number? > BTW, with compcache-0.6 there is an experimental kernel patch that gets rid of > all this stale data: > http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/41083/ > > However, this compcache version needs at least kernel 2.6.28. This version also > fixes all known problems on ARM. compcache-0.5.3 or earlier is known to crash on > ARM (see: http://code.google.com/p/compcache/issues/detail?id=33). > Chungki. Is it reproducible easily ? Could you try it with compcache-0.6. As Nitin said, it seems to solve cache aliasing problem. > Thanks, > Nitin -- Kind regards, Minchan Kim -- 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