From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Christophe LEROY <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org,
"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: OOM killer invoked while still one forth of mem is available
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 15:11:54 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180426131154.GQ17484@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <296ea83c-2c00-f1d2-3f62-d8ab8b8fb73c@c-s.fr>
On Thu 26-04-18 08:10:30, Christophe LEROY wrote:
>
>
> Le 25/04/2018 a 21:57, David Rientjes a ecrit :
> > 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
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Christophe LEROY <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org,
"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: OOM killer invoked while still one forth of mem is available
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 15:11:54 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180426131154.GQ17484@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <296ea83c-2c00-f1d2-3f62-d8ab8b8fb73c@c-s.fr>
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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-04-26 13:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-04-24 19:26 OOM killer invoked while still one forth of mem is available christophe leroy
2018-04-25 19:57 ` David Rientjes
2018-04-26 6:10 ` Christophe LEROY
2018-04-26 6:10 ` Christophe LEROY
2018-04-26 13:11 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2018-04-26 13:11 ` Michal Hocko
2018-04-26 13:28 ` Christophe LEROY
2018-04-26 13:28 ` Christophe LEROY
2018-04-26 19:05 ` Michal Hocko
2018-04-26 19:05 ` Michal Hocko
2018-04-26 20:29 ` LEROY Christophe
2018-04-26 20:29 ` LEROY Christophe
2018-04-27 8:27 ` Michal Hocko
2018-04-27 8:27 ` Michal Hocko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180426131154.GQ17484@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=christophe.leroy@c-s.fr \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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.