lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Aug]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: 2.4.8 Resource leaks + limits
Date
From: "Szabolcs Szakacsits" <szaka@f-secure.com>
[snip]
>
> No, 2.4.8 seems to like to soft lockup in cases after it used up all
> swap. I also run some trivial memory stressing tests on a UP, 128 MB,
> 256 swap, 7 MB/sec UDMA disk subsytem box and after a couple of
> successful recovery [couple = max 1 in my case] the system soft locks.
> swap space was 0, no disk activity, CPU apparently spins in kswapd, all
> relevant zones, inactive_* had plenty free pages and no memory
> fragmentation. After it soft locked none of the VM stat value changed
> at all. Rik also called for help in another thread but the problem seems
> to be not out_of_memory() tuning (when to jump in) however either
> accounting bug or other (kswapd related?) thing - kernel stacks were a
> bit strange [using Right_ALT+Scroll_Lock when soft locked], like
> page_launder
> do_try_to_free_pages
> kswapd
> kswapd
> kswapd
>

Well as i said, my system _never_ locks up completly ( but it might look
that way because it's crawlin'-like-a-dog ).
The problem is that i can shh in as root, but not as any other user ( not
via login or su or either ).
Root always works, and mind you, this is _after_ the "attack", and the
system resources is back to normal as far as i can tell.

It leads me to think something is wrong with the nproc rlimit accounting or
something like that, maybe in the oom kill code?

> Szaka
>


Magnus


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:57    [W:0.066 / U:0.684 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site