All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Memory leak?
@ 2011-07-03 19:09 Stephane Chazelas
  2011-07-03 19:38 ` cwillu
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 61+ messages in thread
From: Stephane Chazelas @ 2011-07-03 19:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-btrfs

Hiya,

I've got a server using brtfs to implement a backup system.
Basically, every night, for a few machines, I rsync (and other
methods) their file systems into one btrfs subvolume each and
then snapshot it.

On that server, the btrfs fs is on 3 3TB drives, mounted with
compress-force. Every week, I rsync the most recent snapshot of
a selection of subvolumes onto an encrypted (LUKS) external hard
drive (3TB as well).

Now, on a few occasions (actually, most of the time), when I
rsynced the data (about 2.5TB) onto the external drive, the
system would crash after some time with "Out of memory and no
killable process". Basically, something in kernel was allocating
the whole memory, then oom mass killed everybody and crash.

That was with ubuntu 2.6.38. I had then moved to debian and
2.6.39 and thought the problem was fixed, but it just happened
again with 3.0.0rc5 while rsyncing onto an initially empty btrfs
fs.

I'm going to resume the rsync again, and it's likely to happen
again. Is there anything simple (as I've got very little time to
look into that) I could do to help debug the issue (I'm not 100%
sure it's btrfs fault but that's the most likely culprit).

For a start, I'll switch the console to serial, and watch
/proc/vmstat. Anything else I could do?

Note that that server has never crashed when doing a lot of IO
at the same time in a lot of subvolumes with remote hosts. It's
only when copying data to that external drive on LUKS that it
seems to crash.

Cheers,
Stephane

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 61+ messages in thread
* memory leak ?
@ 2015-08-10 12:57 Pankaj Pandey
  2015-08-10 13:04 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 61+ messages in thread
From: Pankaj Pandey @ 2015-08-10 12:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-arm-kernel

Hi All,

I am using 3.10 kernel on armv7 target board. We  observed  that
Active(file), Inactive(file) and Buffers sections in /proc/meminfo
have shown increase in memory usage even though none of the processes
running in the system show increased memory usage. Please find log
below:


Log at 5 min
Buffers:           23164 kB
Active(file):      35128 kB
Inactive(file):    97032 kB


log at  30 min.
Buffers:           65960 kB
Active(file):      76024 kB
Inactive(file):   117180 kB

Is this a memory leak ? if yes how we can capture who is consuming these
memories.

Regards,
Pankaj

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 61+ messages in thread
* Memory leak?
@ 2011-01-21 12:39 Damnshock
  2011-01-21 12:52 ` Chris Wilson
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 61+ messages in thread
From: Damnshock @ 2011-01-21 12:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: intel-gfx

Hello everyone.

Yesterday I noticed that something is eating up a lot of memory and it
seems to be my Intel card: whenever I turn off desktop effects on kwin
I get almost 1Gb of memory freed. Is this normal? Might it be kwin's
fault?
Could you please point me where I could debug this like checking info
on /proc or something like that?

Thanks in advance

System info:

Toshiba U200
Intel Corporation Mobile 945GM
xf86-video-intel 2.14.0
intel-dri 7.10
libdrm 2.4.23
kernel26 2.6.37
xorg-server 1.9.3.901



Regards,

Damnshock

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 61+ messages in thread
* memory leak?
@ 2008-02-07 11:44 Gergely Gábor
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 61+ messages in thread
From: Gergely Gábor @ 2008-02-07 11:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: NILFS Users mailing list


[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 843 bytes --]

Hello!

As I stated in my previous letter, something eats up my ram. After a few hours of usage of nilfs without the GC (mount -i) the memory consumption has significantly raised (from ~33 megs to ~465megs). I ran rtorrent (as previously that program triggered a bug). this amount slowly added up, it took ~2.5 hours, and if it continued in this rate, soon the computer would become unusable. I'd be more happy if the GC caused the leak, as that runs in userspace and can be debugged more easily even by me. Previously i didn't notice such behaviour, so this might be related to the patch Ryusuke sent meg on the 5th of February.

Best Regards,
-- 
Gergely Gábor <elentirmo.gilgalad-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>

* random fortune:
My sister opened a computer store in Hawaii.  She sells C shells down 
by the seashore.

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 158 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users-JrjvKiOkagjYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org
https://www.nilfs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 61+ messages in thread
* RE: Memory leak?
@ 2003-11-04 17:01 Daniel Chemko
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 61+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Chemko @ 2003-11-04 17:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Michael Friedhoff, netfilter

I had problems with POM code and Redhat 8/9 kernels. I upgraded to
2.4.22 with all the POM patches I could apply and the problem went away.
You may also want to decrease the TCP CLOSE_WAIT timeout to something
reasonable if you are getting way too many CLOSE_WAITs in ip_conntrack

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Friedhoff [mailto:michael@profindy.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 6:49 AM
To: netfilter@lists.netfilter.org
Subject: Memory leak?

Does anyone know of any memory leaks in the
netfilter code?

I have a dedicated dual 667 running as a SNAT server.
It has two Intel Pro100S adapter.  This is a RedHat 9
box.  I am running kernel version 2.4.20-8smp.  I know
it is not as current as what it should be.  This is a
production box and have not had the time to upgrade the
kernel.  I have noticed a steady decrease in the amount
of memory being utilized.

[root@nat root]# ps -A
  PID TTY          TIME CMD
    1 ?        00:00:06 init
    2 ?        00:00:00 migration/0
    3 ?        00:00:00 migration/1
    4 ?        00:00:00 keventd
    5 ?        00:00:00 ksoftirqd_CPU0
    6 ?        00:00:00 ksoftirqd_CPU1
   11 ?        00:00:00 bdflush
    7 ?        00:00:01 kswapd
    8 ?        00:00:00 kscand/DMA
    9 ?        00:00:56 kscand/Normal
   10 ?        00:00:00 kscand/HighMem
   12 ?        00:00:00 kupdated
   13 ?        00:00:00 mdrecoveryd
   21 ?        00:00:05 kjournald
   79 ?        00:00:00 khubd
 1239 ?        00:00:00 kjournald
 1619 ?        00:00:07 syslogd
 1623 ?        00:00:00 klogd
 1641 ?        00:00:00 portmap
 1968 ?        00:00:00 sshd
 2006 ?        00:00:00 gpm
 2053 ?        00:00:00 crond
 2286 ?        00:00:00 atd
 2345 tty2     00:00:00 mingetty
 2346 tty3     00:00:00 mingetty
 2347 tty4     00:00:00 mingetty
 2348 tty5     00:00:00 mingetty
 2352 tty6     00:00:00 mingetty
 4596 tty1     00:00:00 mingetty
 5013 ?        00:02:05 sshd
 5016 pts/0    00:00:00 bash
 5662 pts/0    00:00:00 ps

I am not positive that netfilter is the cause for
the memory loss, but it is the only purpose of the
machine.  In the last 12 hours, the amout of
available memory has decreased by 1.5MB.  I know
that isn't much, but since this is a production box,
I would rather not have to reboot it constantly.

--Michael Friedhoff




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 61+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <20031103142830.14782.87331.Mailman@netfilter-sponsored-by.noris.net>]
* memory leak?
@ 2002-07-21 14:00 Måns Rullgård
  2002-07-21 14:19 ` Rik van Riel
  2002-07-22 14:08 ` Andrew Rodland
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 61+ messages in thread
From: Måns Rullgård @ 2002-07-21 14:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel


I noticed that doing lots or file accesses causes the used memory to
increase, *after* subtracting buffers/cache. Here is an example:

$ free
             total       used       free     shared    buffers     cached
Mem:        773776      30024     743752          0       1992      10424
-/+ buffers/cache:      17608     756168
Swap:        81904          0      81904
$ du > /dev/null
$ free
             total       used       free     shared    buffers     cached
Mem:        773776      78008     695768          0      26328      10472
-/+ buffers/cache:      41208     732568
Swap:        81904          0      81904

Here 24 MB of memory have been used up. Repeating the du seems to have
little effect. This directory has ~3200 subdirs and 13400 files.

After a few hours use about 200 MB are used, apperently for
nothing. Killing all processed and unmounting file systems doesn't
help.

Is this a memory leak? I get the same results with ext2, ext3,
reiserfs and nfs.

-- 
Måns Rullgård
mru@users.sf.net

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 61+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-08-10 13:04 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 61+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-07-03 19:09 Memory leak? Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-03 19:38 ` cwillu
2011-07-06  8:11   ` Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-07  8:09     ` Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-07  8:20       ` Li Zefan
2011-07-07  8:37         ` Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-08 12:44     ` Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-08 15:06       ` Chris Mason
2011-07-08 15:41         ` Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-08 16:11           ` Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-08 16:17             ` Chris Mason
2011-07-08 16:57               ` Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-09 17:11               ` Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-08 16:15           ` Chris Mason
2011-07-08 17:06             ` Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-08 20:04             ` Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-08 20:12               ` Chris Mason
2011-07-09  7:09                 ` Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-09  7:42                   ` A lot of writing to FS only read (Was: Memory leak?) Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-10  5:58                   ` Memory leak? Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-09 17:09         ` Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-09 19:25           ` cwillu
2011-07-09 20:36             ` Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-10 12:44               ` Chris Mason
2011-07-10 18:37                 ` Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-11  9:01                   ` Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-11 15:00                     ` Chris Mason
2011-07-11 15:35                       ` Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-11 16:25                         ` Chris Mason
2011-07-11 16:34                           ` Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-12 11:40                     ` Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-16 12:12                     ` write(2) taking 4s. (Was: Memory leak?) Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-16 16:22                       ` Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-17  9:17                       ` Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-18 10:39                         ` write(2) taking 4s Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-18 19:37                           ` Stephane Chazelas
2011-07-19  9:32                             ` Stephane Chazelas
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2015-08-10 12:57 memory leak ? Pankaj Pandey
2015-08-10 13:04 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2011-01-21 12:39 Memory leak? Damnshock
2011-01-21 12:52 ` Chris Wilson
2011-01-21 14:22   ` Damnshock
2008-02-07 11:44 memory leak? Gergely Gábor
2003-11-04 17:01 Memory leak? Daniel Chemko
     [not found] <20031103142830.14782.87331.Mailman@netfilter-sponsored-by.noris.net>
2003-11-04 14:49 ` Michael Friedhoff
2003-11-04 22:18   ` Alistair Tonner
2003-11-07 16:53   ` Harald Welte
2002-07-21 14:00 memory leak? Måns Rullgård
2002-07-21 14:19 ` Rik van Riel
2002-07-21 14:23   ` Måns Rullgård
2002-07-21 16:33     ` Alan Cox
2002-07-21 20:48       ` Måns Rullgård
2002-07-21 21:08         ` Rik van Riel
2002-07-30 16:08           ` Bill Davidsen
2002-07-30 16:43             ` Rik van Riel
2002-07-22 14:08 ` Andrew Rodland
2002-07-21 14:19   ` Måns Rullgård
2002-07-21 14:20   ` Martin Josefsson
2002-07-21 22:27     ` Stephan Maciej
2002-07-22 14:26     ` Andrew Rodland
2002-07-21 14:50       ` Rik van Riel

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.