[lkml]   [2006]   [May]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: swapping and oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x201d2, order=0
    On Sat, 2006-05-13 at 15:11 +0300, Al Boldi wrote:
    > Mike Galbraith wrote:
    > > On Fri, 2006-05-12 at 15:17 +0300, Al Boldi wrote:
    > > > Note that this is not specific to mem=8M, but rather a general oom
    > > > observation even for mem=4G, where it is only much later to occur.
    > >
    > > An oom situation with 4G ram would be more interesting than this one.
    > Agreed, but can you tell me what readahead has to do with this oom?
    > oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x201d2, order=0
    > [<c013ff25>] out_of_memory+0xa5/0xc0
    > [<c0141099>] __alloc_pages+0x279/0x310
    > [<c0143669>] __do_page_cache_readahead+0xe9/0x120
    > [<c0143b3f>] max_sane_readahead+0x2f/0x50
    > [<c013d8cb>] filemap_nopage+0x2eb/0x370
    > [<c0149ea5>] do_no_page+0x65/0x220
    > [<c014a1dc>] __handle_mm_fault+0xec/0x200
    > [<c0113258>] do_page_fault+0x188/0x5c5
    > [<c01130d0>] do_page_fault+0x0/0x5c5
    > [<c0103a0f>] error_code+0x4f/0x54

    Nothing except that it asked for a page at a bad time, triggering the
    bad-hair-day reaction. That being said, the readahead allocation mask
    should have probably included GFP_NORETRY. (though with 8MB, if the
    readahead didn't get you, the subsequent read probably would anyway)


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2006-05-13 14:56    [W:0.021 / U:5.316 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site