lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [May]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 2.6.17-rc4-mm1
Andrew Morton a écrit :
> Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Andrew
>>
>> It seems latest kernels have a problem in kmem_cache_destroy()
>>
>
> Mainline, or just -mm?
>
>
Mainline and mm it seems, only if NUMA is ON, on 2.6.17 only (2.6.16.XX
is OK)

I added some printks and it seems slab_partials is not empty in
__node_shrink() for node 0

I am not a mm/slab.c expert but the following patch cures the problem
for me :

[PATCH] slab : NUMA may need __cache_shrink() doing two loops.

Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>




--- linux-2.6.17-rc4/mm/slab.c 2006-05-15 14:58:09.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-2.6.17-rc4-ed/mm/slab.c 2006-05-15 15:23:07.000000000 +0200
@@ -2225,25 +2225,32 @@
spin_lock_irq(&l3->list_lock);
}
ret = !list_empty(&l3->slabs_full) || !list_empty(&l3->slabs_partial);
+ if (ret)
+ printk(KERN_ERR "__node_shrink(name=%s,node=%d) ret=%d\n",
+ cachep->name, node, ret);
return ret;
}

static int __cache_shrink(struct kmem_cache *cachep)
{
- int ret = 0, i = 0;
+ int ret, i;
struct kmem_list3 *l3;
+ int loopcount = 0;

- drain_cpu_caches(cachep);
+ do {
+ ret = 0;
+ drain_cpu_caches(cachep);

- check_irq_on();
- for_each_online_node(i) {
- l3 = cachep->nodelists[i];
- if (l3) {
- spin_lock_irq(&l3->list_lock);
- ret += __node_shrink(cachep, i);
- spin_unlock_irq(&l3->list_lock);
+ check_irq_on();
+ for_each_online_node(i) {
+ l3 = cachep->nodelists[i];
+ if (l3) {
+ spin_lock_irq(&l3->list_lock);
+ ret += __node_shrink(cachep, i);
+ spin_unlock_irq(&l3->list_lock);
+ }
}
- }
+ } while (ret && ++loopcount < 2);
return (ret ? 1 : 0);
}
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-05-15 15:30    [W:0.084 / U:2.660 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site