Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Fri, 20 Aug 2004 17:49:55 +1000 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: Possible dcache BUG |
| |
Udo A. Steinberg wrote: > On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 00:11:54 -0700 Andrew Morton (AM) wrote: > > AM> "Udo A. Steinberg" <us15@os.inf.tu-dresden.de> wrote: > AM> > > AM> > I've tried to download 700 MB of data from a digital camera via USB using > AM> > "gphoto2 --get-all-files" and I can repeatedly run my 128 MB box out of > AM> > memory using either Linux 2.4.26 or 2.6.8.1 for that. > AM> > AM> whee. How much swap is online? > > Something close to 512 MB. > > Adding 506512k swap on /dev/hda2. Priority:-1 extents:1 > > AM> Not that it matters - you seem to have a bunch of reclaimable pagecache > AM> just sitting there. Very odd. > AM> > AM> Could gphoto2 be using mlock? Does it run as root? > > No, gphoto2 was not running as root. > > -Udo.
Can you reproduce the OOM with the following patch please? Then send the output.
Thanks
---
linux-2.6-npiggin/mm/page_alloc.c | 6 +++++- 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff -puN mm/page_alloc.c~vm-unreclaimable-debug mm/page_alloc.c --- linux-2.6/mm/page_alloc.c~vm-unreclaimable-debug 2004-08-20 17:44:45.000000000 +1000 +++ linux-2.6-npiggin/mm/page_alloc.c 2004-08-20 17:48:26.000000000 +1000 @@ -1182,6 +1182,8 @@ void show_free_areas(void) " active:%lukB" " inactive:%lukB" " present:%lukB" + " pages_scanned:%lu" + " all_unreclaimable? %s" "\n", zone->name, K(zone->free_pages), @@ -1190,7 +1192,9 @@ void show_free_areas(void) K(zone->pages_high), K(zone->nr_active), K(zone->nr_inactive), - K(zone->present_pages) + K(zone->present_pages), + zone->pages_scanned, + (zone->all_unreclaimable ? "yes" : "no") ); printk("protections[]:"); for (i = 0; i < MAX_NR_ZONES; i++) _
| |