On Thu 26-04-18 08:10:30, Christophe LEROY wrote: > > > Le 25/04/2018 à 21:57, David Rientjes a écrit : > > On Tue, 24 Apr 2018, christophe leroy wrote: > > > > > Hi > > > > > > Allthough there is still about one forth of memory available (7976kB > > > among 32MB), oom-killer is invoked and makes a victim. > > > > > > What could be the reason and how could it be solved ? > > > > > > [ 54.400754] S99watchdogd-ap invoked oom-killer: > > > gfp_mask=0x27000c0(GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT|__GFP_NOTRACK), nodemask=0, > > > order=1, oom_score_adj=0 > > > [ 54.400815] CPU: 0 PID: 777 Comm: S99watchdogd-ap Not tainted > > > 4.9.85-local-knld-998 #5 > > > [ 54.400830] Call Trace: > > > [ 54.400910] [c1ca5d10] [c0327d28] dump_header.isra.4+0x54/0x17c > > > (unreliable) > > > [ 54.400998] [c1ca5d50] [c0079d88] oom_kill_process+0xc4/0x414 > > > [ 54.401067] [c1ca5d90] [c007a5c8] out_of_memory+0x35c/0x37c > > > [ 54.401220] [c1ca5dc0] [c007d68c] __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x8ec/0x9a8 > > > [ 54.401318] [c1ca5e70] [c00169d4] copy_process.isra.9.part.10+0xdc/0x10d0 > > > [ 54.401398] [c1ca5f00] [c0017b30] _do_fork+0xcc/0x2a8 > > > [ 54.401473] [c1ca5f40] [c000a660] ret_from_syscall+0x0/0x38 > > > > Looks like this is because the allocation is order-1, likely the > > allocation of a struct task_struct for a new process on fork. > > I'm not sure I understand what you mean. The allocation is order 1, yes, > does it explains why OOM killer is invoked ? Well, not really [ 54.437414] DMA: 460*4kB (UH) 201*8kB (UH) 121*16kB (UH) 43*32kB (UH) 10*64kB (U) 4*128kB (UH) 0*256kB 0*512kB 0*1024kB 0*2048kB 0*4096kB 0*8192kB = 7912kB` You should have enough order-1+ pages to proceed. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
