Re: [BUG] fatal hang untarring 90GB file, possibly writebackrelated.

[Colin Ian King]

On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 16:44 +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 08:42:24AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > 
> > 1. High-order allocations? You machine is using i915 and RPC, something
> >    neither of my test machine uses. i915 is potentially a source for
> >    high-order allocations. I'm attaching a perl script. Please run it as
> >    ./watch-highorder.pl --output /tmp/highorders.txt
> >    while you are running tar. When kswapd is running for about 30
> >    seconds, interrupt it with ctrl+c twice in quick succession and
> >    post /tmp/highorders.txt
> > 
> 
> Colin send me this information for his test case at least and I see
> 
> 11932 instances order=1 normal gfp_flags=GFP_NOWARN|GFP_NORETRY|GFP_COMP|GFP_NOMEMALLOC
>  => alloc_pages_current+0xa5/0x110 <ffffffff81149ef5>
>  => new_slab+0x1f5/0x290 <ffffffff81153645>
>  => __slab_alloc+0x262/0x390 <ffffffff81155192>
>  => kmem_cache_alloc+0x115/0x120 <ffffffff81155ab5>
>  => mempool_alloc_slab+0x15/0x20 <ffffffff8110e705>
>  => mempool_alloc+0x59/0x140 <ffffffff8110ea49>
>  => bio_alloc_bioset+0x3e/0xf0 <ffffffff811976ae>
>  => bio_alloc+0x15/0x30 <ffffffff81197805>
> 
> Colin and James: Did you happen to switch from SLAB to SLUB between
> 2.6.37 and 2.6.38? My own tests were against SLAB which might be why I
> didn't see the problem. Am restarting the tests with SLUB.

So I tested with SLAB instead of SLUB and I reliably ran my copy test
for 4+ hours with several hundred iterations of the test.  (Apologies
for taking time to respond, but I was travelling).
> 


--
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/