Messages in this thread | | | From | "Magnus Naeslund(f)" <> | Subject | Re: 2.4.8 Resource leaks + limits | Date | Wed, 15 Aug 2001 16:20:41 +0200 |
| |
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/
| |