From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail190.messagelabs.com (mail190.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 227F86B004D for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2009 05:14:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from spaceape11.eur.corp.google.com (spaceape11.eur.corp.google.com [172.28.16.145]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id n969EVJJ022107 for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2009 10:14:31 +0100 Received: from pxi15 (pxi15.prod.google.com [10.243.27.15]) by spaceape11.eur.corp.google.com with ESMTP id n969ESdU022612 for ; Tue, 6 Oct 2009 02:14:29 -0700 Received: by pxi15 with SMTP id 15so3625327pxi.26 for ; Tue, 06 Oct 2009 02:14:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 02:14:26 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rientjes Subject: Re: [Bug #14141] order 2 page allocation failures in iwlagn In-Reply-To: <20091006085345.GA18185@csn.ul.ie> Message-ID: References: <3onW63eFtRF.A.xXH.oMTxKB@chimera> <200910050851.02056.elendil@planet.nl> <20091005085739.GB5452@csn.ul.ie> <200910052334.23833.elendil@planet.nl> <20091006085345.GA18185@csn.ul.ie> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Mel Gorman Cc: Frans Pop , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Kernel Testers List , Pekka Enberg , Reinette Chatre , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , Karol Lewandowski , linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Tue, 6 Oct 2009, Mel Gorman wrote: > > > And the winner is: > > > 2ff05b2b4eac2e63d345fc731ea151a060247f53 is first bad commit > > > commit 2ff05b2b4eac2e63d345fc731ea151a060247f53 > > > Author: David Rientjes > > > Date: Tue Jun 16 15:32:56 2009 -0700 > > > > > > oom: move oom_adj value from task_struct to mm_struct > > > > > > I'm confident that the bisection is good. The test case was very reliable > > > while zooming in on the merge from akpm. > > > > > > > I doubt it for two reasons: (i) this commit was reverted in 0753ba0 since > > 2.6.31-rc7 and is no longer in the kernel, and (ii) these are GFP_ATOMIC > > allocations which would be unaffected by oom killer scores. > > > > However, the problem was reported to start showing up in 2.6.31-rc1 so > while it might not be *the* patch, it might be making the type of change > that caused more fragmentation. This patch adjusted the size of > mm_struct and maybe it was enough to change the "order" required for the > slab. Maybe there are other slabs that have changed size as well in that > timeframe. > > Frans, what is the size of mm_struct before and after this patch was > applied? Find it with either > > grep mm_struct /proc/slabinfo > > and if the information is not available there, try > > cat /sys/kernel/slab/mm_struct/slab_size and > /sys/kernel/slab/mm_struct/order > If that's the case and the problem still persists in 2.6.31-rc7 as reported, then you'd need to compare the current slab order for both mm_struct and signal_struct to the previously known working kernel since the latter is where oom_adj was moved. (You'd still have to check the former to see if there were any mm_struct additions between rc1 and rc7 between the commit and revert, though.) -- 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