On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 12:03:40PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 10:19:25AM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 04:26:45PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > > > > 970 if (WARN_ON_ONCE((current->flags & (PF_MEMALLOC|PF_KSWAPD)) == > > > > 971 PF_MEMALLOC)) > > > > > > What were you running at the time? The XFS warning is there to > > > indicate that memory reclaim is doing something it shouldn't (i.e. > > > dirty page writeback from direct reclaim), so this is one for the mm > > > folk to work out... > > > > Trinity had driven the machine deeply into swap, and the oom killer was > > kicking in pretty often. Then this happened. > > Yup, sounds like a problem somewhere in mm/vmscan.c.... I'm now hitting this fairly often, and no-one seems to have offered up any suggestions yet, so I'm going to flail and guess randomly until someone has a better idea what could be wrong. That WARN commentary for the benefit of linux-mm readers.. 960 /* 961 * Refuse to write the page out if we are called from reclaim context. 962 * 963 * This avoids stack overflows when called from deeply used stacks in 964 * random callers for direct reclaim or memcg reclaim. We explicitly 965 * allow reclaim from kswapd as the stack usage there is relatively low. 966 * 967 * This should never happen except in the case of a VM regression so 968 * warn about it. 969 */ 970 if (WARN_ON_ONCE((current->flags & (PF_MEMALLOC|PF_KSWAPD)) == 971 PF_MEMALLOC)) 972 goto redirty; Looking at this trace.. xfs_vm_writepage+0x5ce/0x630 [xfs] ? preempt_count_sub+0xab/0x100 ? __percpu_counter_add+0x85/0xc0 shrink_page_list+0x8f9/0xb90 shrink_inactive_list+0x253/0x510 shrink_lruvec+0x563/0x6c0 shrink_zone+0x3b/0x100 shrink_zones+0x1f1/0x3c0 try_to_free_pages+0x164/0x380 __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x822/0xc90 alloc_pages_vma+0xaf/0x1c0 read_swap_cache_async+0x123/0x220 ? final_putname+0x22/0x50 swapin_readahead+0x149/0x1d0 ? find_get_entry+0xd5/0x130 ? pagecache_get_page+0x30/0x210 ? debug_smp_processor_id+0x17/0x20 handle_mm_fault+0x9d5/0xc50 __do_page_fault+0x1d2/0x640 ? __acct_update_integrals+0x8b/0x120 ? preempt_count_sub+0xab/0x100 do_page_fault+0x1e/0x70 page_fault+0x22/0x30 The reclaim here looks to be triggered from the readahead code. Should something in that path be setting PF_KSWAPD in the gfp mask ? Dave _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
