From: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
To: Karol Lewandowski <karol.k.lewandowski@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
stable <stable@kernel.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>, Frans Pop <elendil@planet.nl>,
reinette chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>,
Kalle Valo <kalle.valo@iki.fi>,
"John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Reduce number of GFP_ATOMIC allocation failures
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 15:13:59 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091019141359.GF9036@csn.ul.ie> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091017183421.GA3370@bizet.domek.prywatny>
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 08:34:21PM +0200, Karol Lewandowski wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 11:37:24AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > The following two patches against 2.6.32-rc4 should reduce allocation
> > failure reports for GFP_ATOMIC allocations that have being cropping up
> > since 2.6.31-rc1.
> ...
> > The patches should also help the following bugs as well and testing there
> > would be appreciated.
> >
> > [Bug #14265] ifconfig: page allocation failure. order:5, mode:0x8020 w/ e100
> >
> > It might also have helped the following bug
>
> These patches actually made situation kind-of "worse" for this
> particular issue.
>
> I've tried patches with post 2.6.32-rc4 kernel and after second
> suspend-resume cycle I got typical "order:5" failure. However, this
> time when I manually tried to bring interface up ("ifup eth0") it
> failed for 4 consecutive times with "Can't allocate memory". Before
> applying these patches this never occured -- kernel sometimes failed
> to allocate memory during resume, but it *never* failed afterwards.
>
I'm hoping the patch + the revert which I asked for in another mail will
help. It's been clear for a while that more than one thing went wrong
during this cycle.
> I'll go now for another round of bisecting... and hopefully this time
> I'll be able to trigger this problem on different/faster computer with
> e100-based card.
>
>
> > although that driver has already been fixed by not making high-order
> > atomic allocations.
>
> Driver has been fixed? The one patch that I saw (by davem[1]) didn't
> fix this issue. As of 2.6.32-rc5 I see no fixes to e100.c in
> mainline, has there been another than this[1] fix posted somewhere?
>
> [1] http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/10/12/169
>
The driver that was fixed was for the ipw2200, not the e100.
Thanks
--
Mel Gorman
Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center
University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-19 14:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-16 10:37 [PATCH 0/2] Reduce number of GFP_ATOMIC allocation failures Mel Gorman
2009-10-16 10:37 ` [PATCH 1/2] page allocator: Always wake kswapd when restarting an allocation attempt after direct reclaim failed Mel Gorman
2009-10-16 10:52 ` Pekka Enberg
2009-10-19 7:40 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-10-16 10:37 ` [PATCH 2/2] page allocator: Direct reclaim should always obey watermarks Mel Gorman
2009-10-16 19:07 ` David Rientjes
2009-10-16 22:32 ` Mel Gorman
2009-10-16 23:28 ` Frans Pop
2009-10-27 21:00 ` Frans Pop
2009-10-17 18:34 ` [PATCH 0/2] Reduce number of GFP_ATOMIC allocation failures Karol Lewandowski
2009-10-18 22:18 ` Karol Lewandowski
2009-10-18 22:31 ` Frans Pop
2009-10-19 0:36 ` Karol Lewandowski
2009-10-19 14:13 ` Mel Gorman [this message]
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=20091019141359.GF9036@csn.ul.ie \
--to=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bzolnier@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=elendil@planet.nl \
--cc=kalle.valo@iki.fi \
--cc=karol.k.lewandowski@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
--cc=reinette.chatre@intel.com \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=stable@kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).