linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
To: Karol Lewandowski <karol.k.lewandowski@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Frans Pop <elendil@planet.nl>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>,
	Sven Geggus <lists@fuchsschwanzdomain.de>,
	Tobias Oetiker <tobi@oetiker.ch>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
	Stephan von Krawczynski <skraw@ithnet.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>,
	Kernel Testers List <kernel-testers@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Reduce GFP_ATOMIC allocation failures, candidate fix V3
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 09:52:58 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091116095258.GS29804@csn.ul.ie> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091115120721.GA7557@bizet.domek.prywatny>

On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 01:07:21PM +0100, Karol Lewandowski wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 07:30:30PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> 
> > [Bug #14265] ifconfig: page allocation failure. order:5, mode:0x8020 w/ e100
> 
> > Patches 1-3 should be tested first. The testing I've done shows that the
> > page allocator and behaviour of congestion_wait() is more in line with
> > 2.6.30 than the vanilla kernels.
> > 
> > It'd be nice to have 2 more tests, applying each patch on top noting any
> > behaviour change. i.e. ideally there would be results for
> > 
> >  o patches 1+2+3
> >  o patches 1+2+3+4
> >  o patches 1+2+3+4+5
> > 
> > Of course, any tests results are welcome. The rest of the mail is the
> > results of my own tests.
> 
> I've tried testing 3+4+5 against 2.6.32-rc7 (1+2 seem to be in
> mainline) and got failure.  I've noticed something strange (I think).
> I was unable to trigger failures when system was under heavy memory
> pressure (i.e. my testing - gitk, firefoxes, etc.).  When I killed
> almost all memory hogs, put system into sleep and resumed -- it
> failed.  free(1) showed:
> 
>              total       used       free     shared    buffers     cached
> Mem:        255240     194052      61188          0       4040      49364
> -/+ buffers/cache:     140648     114592
> Swap:       514040      72712     441328
> 
> 
> Is that ok?  Wild guess -- maybe kswapd doesn't take fragmentation (or
> other factors) into account as hard as it used to in 2.6.30?
> 

That's a lot of memory free. I take it the order-5 GFP_ATOMIC allocation
failed. What was the dmesg for it please?

-- 
Mel Gorman
Part-time Phd Student                          Linux Technology Center
University of Limerick                         IBM Dublin Software Lab

--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2009-11-16  9:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-11-12 19:30 Mel Gorman
2009-11-12 19:30 ` [PATCH 1/5] page allocator: Always wake kswapd when restarting an allocation attempt after direct reclaim failed Mel Gorman
2009-11-13  5:23   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-11-13 13:55     ` Mel Gorman
2009-11-12 19:30 ` [PATCH 2/5] page allocator: Do not allow interrupts to use ALLOC_HARDER Mel Gorman
2009-11-13  5:24   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-11-13 13:56     ` Mel Gorman
2009-11-12 19:30 ` [PATCH 3/5] page allocator: Wait on both sync and async congestion after direct reclaim Mel Gorman
2009-11-13 11:20   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-11-13 11:55     ` Jens Axboe
2009-11-13 12:28       ` Mel Gorman
2009-11-13 13:32         ` Jens Axboe
2009-11-13 13:41           ` Pekka Enberg
2009-11-13 15:22             ` Chris Mason
2009-11-13 14:16           ` Mel Gorman
2009-11-20 14:56           ` Mel Gorman
2009-11-12 19:30 ` [PATCH 4/5] vmscan: Have kswapd sleep for a short interval and double check it should be asleep Mel Gorman
2009-11-13 10:43   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-11-13 14:13     ` Mel Gorman
2009-11-13 18:00       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-11-13 18:17         ` Mel Gorman
2009-11-14  9:34           ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-11-14 15:46             ` Mel Gorman
2009-11-17 11:03               ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-11-17 11:44                 ` Mel Gorman
2009-11-17 12:18                   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-11-17 12:25                     ` Mel Gorman
2009-11-18  5:20                       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-11-17 10:34             ` [PATCH] vmscan: Have kswapd sleep for a short interval and double check it should be asleep fix 1 Mel Gorman
2009-11-18  5:27               ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-11-12 19:30 ` [PATCH 5/5] vmscan: Take order into consideration when deciding if kswapd is in trouble Mel Gorman
2009-11-13  9:54   ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-11-13 13:54     ` Mel Gorman
2009-11-13 14:48       ` Minchan Kim
2009-11-13 18:00       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-11-13 18:15         ` [PATCH] vmscan: Stop kswapd waiting on congestion when the min watermark is not being met Mel Gorman
2009-11-13 18:26           ` Frans Pop
2009-11-13 18:33           ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2009-11-13 20:03             ` [PATCH] vmscan: Stop kswapd waiting on congestion when the min watermark is not being met V2 Mel Gorman
2009-11-26 14:45               ` Tobias Oetiker
2009-11-29  7:42                 ` still getting allocation failures (was Re: [PATCH] vmscan: Stop kswapd waiting on congestion when the min watermark is not being met V2) Tobi Oetiker
2009-12-02 11:32                   ` Mel Gorman
2009-12-02 21:30                     ` Tobias Oetiker
2009-12-03 20:26                       ` Corrado Zoccolo
2009-12-14  5:59                         ` Tobias Oetiker
2009-12-14  8:49                           ` Corrado Zoccolo
2009-11-13 18:36           ` [PATCH] vmscan: Stop kswapd waiting on congestion when the min watermark is not being met Rik van Riel
2009-11-13 14:38     ` [PATCH 5/5] vmscan: Take order into consideration when deciding if kswapd is in trouble Minchan Kim
2009-11-13 12:41   ` Minchan Kim
2009-11-13  9:04 ` [PATCH 0/5] Reduce GFP_ATOMIC allocation failures, candidate fix V3 Frans Pop
2009-11-16 17:57   ` Mel Gorman
2009-11-13 12:47 ` Tobias Oetiker
2009-11-13 13:37   ` Mel Gorman
2009-11-15 12:07 ` Karol Lewandowski
2009-11-16  9:52   ` Mel Gorman [this message]
2009-11-16 12:08     ` Karol Lewandowski
2009-11-16 14:32       ` Karol Lewandowski

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20091116095258.GS29804@csn.ul.ie \
    --to=mel@csn.ul.ie \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=cl@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=elendil@planet.nl \
    --cc=jkosina@suse.cz \
    --cc=karol.k.lewandowski@gmail.com \
    --cc=kernel-testers@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=lists@fuchsschwanzdomain.de \
    --cc=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
    --cc=skraw@ithnet.com \
    --cc=tobi@oetiker.ch \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox