Mel Gorman wrote: > On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 07:03:23AM +0100, Tobias Diedrich wrote: > > Mel Gorman wrote: > > > [No BZ ID] Kernel crash on 2.6.31.x (kcryptd: page allocation failure..) > > > This apparently is easily reproducible, particular in comparison to > > > the other reports. The point of greatest interest is that this is > > > order-0 GFP_ATOMIC failures. Sven, I'm hoping that you in particular > > > will be able to follow the tests below as you are the most likely > > > person to have an easily reproducible situation. > > > > I've also seen order-0 failures on 2.6.31.5: > > Note that this is with a one process hogging and mlocking memory and > > min_free_kbytes reduced to 100 to reproduce the problem more easily. > > > > Is that a vanilla, with patches 1-3 applied or both? That was on vanilla 2.6.31.5. I tried 2.6.31.5 before with patches 1+2 and netconsole enabled and still got the order-1 failures (apparently I get order-1 failures with netconsole and order-0 failures without). > > I tried bisecting the issue, but in the end without memory pressure > > I can't reproduce it reliably and with the above mentioned pressure > > I get allocation failures even on 2.6.30.o > > To be honest, it's not entirely unexpected with min_free_kbytes set that > low. The system should cope with a certain amount of pressure but with > pressure and a low min_free_kbytes, the system will simply be reacting > too late to free memory in the non-atomic paths. Maybe I should try again on 2.6.30 without netconsole und try increasing min_free_kbytes until the allocation failures disappear and try to bisect again with that setting... -- Tobias PGP: http://8ef7ddba.uguu.de -- 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
