From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail202.messagelabs.com (mail202.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.227]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 686EF6B007B for ; Sun, 14 Feb 2010 20:22:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from m4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.74]) by fgwmail7.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id o1F1MfOc005764 for (envelope-from kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com); Mon, 15 Feb 2010 10:22:41 +0900 Received: from smail (m4 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id B627845DD70 for ; Mon, 15 Feb 2010 10:22:40 +0900 (JST) Received: from s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.94]) by m4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A86A45DE7A for ; Mon, 15 Feb 2010 10:22:40 +0900 (JST) Received: from s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5C101DB8047 for ; Mon, 15 Feb 2010 10:22:39 +0900 (JST) Received: from ml14.s.css.fujitsu.com (ml14.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.104]) by s4.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D6CE1DB8044 for ; Mon, 15 Feb 2010 10:22:39 +0900 (JST) Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 10:19:17 +0900 From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: Re: 2.6.31 and OOM killer = bug? Message-Id: <20100215101917.15552a51.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Anton Starikov Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "linux-mm@kvack.org" List-ID: On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 00:43:02 +0100 Anton Starikov wrote: > Hi, > > The setup: > is 16-core opteron node, diskless with NFS root, swapless, 64GB of RAM. Operating under OpenSUSE 11.2. With kernel version 2.6.31. Although it isn't vanilla, I think probably more right is to submit this into LKML. > At first, what is the version of kernel you are comparing with ? 2.6.22?(If OpenSuse10) If so, many changes since that.. > The problem: > On this node user run MPI job with 16 processes, local job by using shared memory communication. > At some point this processes are trying to use more memory that available. > Normally, all of them or part of them would be killed by OOM killer, and it use to work for years over many versions of kernel. > > Now, with fresh setup I got something new. OOM tried to kill, but didn't succeed, and even more, brought system in unusable state. All those processes are locked and un-killable. some of other processes are also locked and un-killable/inaccessible. kswapd consume 100% CPU (which I think is expected behavior when there is no free memory). > No free memory obviously, cause all original processes are still in memory. > > I tried to test OOM behavior and it always happens like that now. > > Here I attach full gzipped log of all related information captured by logserver (sent by logserver and netconsole, so it can be partly doubled). Sorry that it is too big, but I didn't know what information can be important. > Anyway, I think it's not appreciated to depend on OOM-Kill on swapless-system. I recommend you to use cgroup "memory" to encapsulate your apps (but please check the performance regression can be seen or not..) Thanks, -Kame -- 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