[Cc netdev] On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 09:09:44AM +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote: > On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 11:34 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki<rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report > > of recent regressions. > > > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions > > from 2.6.30. Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know > > (either way). > > > > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14016 > > Subject : mm/ipw2200 regression > > Submitter : Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@xxxxxxxxx> > > Date : 2009-08-15 16:56 (11 days old) > > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=125036437221408&w=4 > > If am reading the page allocator dump correctly, there's plenty of > pages left but we're unable to satisfy an order 6 allocation. There's > no slab allocator involved so the page allocator changes that went > into 2.6.31 seem likely. Mel, ideas? It's an atomic order-6 allocation, the chances for this to succeed after some uptime become infinitesimal. The chunks > order-2 are pretty much exhausted on this dump. 64 pages, presumably 256k, for fw->boot_size while current ipw firmware images have ~188k. I don't know jack squat about this driver, but given the field name and the struct: struct ipw_fw { __le32 ver; __le32 boot_size; __le32 ucode_size; __le32 fw_size; u8 data[0]; }; fw->boot_size alone being that big sounds a bit fishy to me. Hannes -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-testers" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
