Re: OOM problems on 2.6.12-rc1 with many fsx tests

[Andrew Morton]

"Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > It would be interesting if you could run the same test on 2.6.11.  
> 
> One thing I'm finding is that it's hard to backtrace who has each page
> in this sort of situation. My plan is to write a debug patch to walk
> mem_map and dump out some info on each page. I would appreciate ideas
> on what info would be useful here. Some things are fairly obvious, like
> we want to know if it's anon / mapped into address space (& which),
> whether it's slab / buffers / pagecache etc ... any other suggestions
> you have would be much appreciated.

You could use

	page-owner-tracking-leak-detector.patch
	make-page_owner-handle-non-contiguous-page-ranges.patch
	add-gfp_mask-to-page-owner.patch

which sticks an 8-slot stack backtrace into each page, recording who
allocated it.

But that's probably not very interesting info for pagecache pages.

Nothing beats poking around in a dead machine's guts with kgdb though.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/