From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail137.messagelabs.com (mail137.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.19]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4E6556B005A for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2009 07:08:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: by yxe14 with SMTP id 14so5587369yxe.12 for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2009 04:08:03 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20090819105829.GH24809@csn.ul.ie> References: <18eba5a10908181841t145e4db1wc2daf90f7337aa6e@mail.gmail.com> <20090819114408.ab9c8a78.minchan.kim@barrios-desktop> <4A8B7508.4040001@vflare.org> <20090819135105.e6b69a8d.minchan.kim@barrios-desktop> <18eba5a10908182324x45261d06y83e0f042e9ee6b20@mail.gmail.com> <20090819154958.18a34aa5.minchan.kim@barrios-desktop> <20090819103611.GG24809@csn.ul.ie> <20090819195242.4454a35f.minchan.kim@barrios-desktop> <20090819105829.GH24809@csn.ul.ie> Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 20:01:12 +0900 Message-ID: <28c262360908190401y217cf9d0wd502fdfb53cfe174@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: abnormal OOM killer message From: Minchan Kim Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Mel Gorman Cc: ????????? , ngupta@vflare.org, 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 List-ID: On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 7:58 PM, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 07:52:42PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: >> Thanks for good comment, Mel. >> >> On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 11:36:11 +0100 >> Mel Gorman wrote: >> >> > On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 03:49:58PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: >> > > On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 15:24:54 +0900 >> > > ????????? wrote: >> > > >> > > > Thank you very much for replys. >> > > > >> > > > But I think it seems not to relate with stale data problem in comp= cache. >> > > > My question was why last chance to allocate memory was failed. >> > > > When OOM killer is executed, memory state is not a condition to >> > > > execute OOM killer. >> > > > Specially, there are so many pages of order 0. And allocating orde= r is zero. >> > > > I think that last allocating memory should have succeeded. >> > > > That's my worry. >> > > >> > > Yes. I agree with you. >> > > Mel. Could you give some comment in this situation ? >> > > Is it possible that order 0 allocation is failed >> > > even there are many pages in buddy ? >> > > >> > >> > Not ordinarily. If it happens, I tend to suspect that the free list da= ta >> > is corrupted and would put a check in __rmqueue() that looked like >> > >> > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 BUG_ON(list_empty(&area->free_list) && area->nr_free); >> >> If memory is corrupt, it would be not satisfied with both condition. >> It would be better to ORed condition. >> >> BUG_ON(list_empty(&area->free_list) || area->nr_free); >> > > But it's perfectly reasonable to have nr_free a positive value. The > point of the check is ensure the counters make sense. If nr_free > 0 and > the list is empty, it means accounting is all messed up and the values > reported for "free" in the OOM message are fiction. Huh. My mistake. I confused it with !area->nr_free. Sorry for confusing you. Thanks again. > >> > The second question is, why are we in direct reclaim this far above th= e >> > watermark? It should only be kswapd that is doing any reclaim at that >> > point. That makes me wonder again are the free lists corrupted. >> >> It does make sense! >> >> > The other possibility is that the zonelist used for allocation in the >> > troubled path contains no populated zones. I would put a BUG_ON check = in >> > get_page_from_freelist() to check if the first zone in the zonelist ha= s no >> > pages. If that bug triggers, it might explain why OOMs are triggering = for >> > no good reason. >> >> Yes. Chungki. Could you put the both BUG_ON in each function and >> try to reproduce the problem ? >> >> > I consider both of those possibilities abnormal though. >> > >> > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------= ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= -- >> > > > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 page =3D get_page_from_freelist(gfp_mask|__GF= P_HARDWALL, order, >> > > > <=3D=3D this is last chance >> > > > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0zonelist, ALLOC_WMARK_HIGH|ALLOC_CPUSET); >> > > > <=3D=3D uses ALLOC_WMARK_HIGH >> > > > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 if (page) >> > > > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 goto got_pg; >> > > > >> > > > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 out_of_memory(zonelist, gfp_mask, order); >> > > > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 goto restart; >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------= ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= -- >> > > > >> > > > > 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? >> > > > >> > > > Yeah, It's possible. 79Mbyte is data size can be swap. >> > > > It's not compressed data size. It's just original data size. >> > > >> > > You means your pages with 79M are swap out in compcache's reserved >> > > memory? >> > > >> > >> > -- >> > Mel Gorman >> > Part-time Phd Student =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0= =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Linux Technology Center >> > University of Limerick =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 IBM Dublin Software Lab >> >> >> -- >> Kind regards, >> Minchan Kim >> > > -- > Mel Gorman > Part-time Phd Student =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Linux Technology Center > University of Limerick =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 IBM Dublin Software Lab > --=20 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