On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 10:53:41 +0200 Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sat, 2007-09-29 at 10:47 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > Ah, right, that was the detail... all this lumpy reclaim is useless for > > atomic allocations. And with SLUB using higher order pages, atomic !0 > > order allocations will be very very common. > > > > One I can remember was: > > > > add_to_page_cache() > > radix_tree_insert() > > radix_tree_node_alloc() > > kmem_cache_alloc() > > > > which is an atomic callsite. > > > > Which leaves us in a situation where we can load pages, because there is > > free memory, but can't manage to allocate memory to track them.. > > Ah, I found a boot log of one of these sessions, its also full of > order-2 OOMs.. :-/ oom-killings, or page allocation failures? The latter, one hopes. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
