From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail190.messagelabs.com (mail190.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF4776B0011 for ; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 06:26:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from d01relay06.pok.ibm.com (d01relay06.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.116]) by e9.ny.us.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id p3S9vdHi015736 for ; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 05:57:39 -0400 Received: from d01av01.pok.ibm.com (d01av01.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.215]) by d01relay06.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id p3SAQCfH1097778 for ; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 06:26:12 -0400 Received: from d01av01.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av01.pok.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id p3SAQBcg017776 for ; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 06:26:12 -0400 Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 03:26:09 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" Subject: Re: 2.6.39-rc4+: Kernel leaking memory during FS scanning, regression? Message-ID: <20110428102609.GJ2135@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20110426112756.GF4308@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20110426183859.6ff6279b@neptune.home> <20110426190918.01660ccf@neptune.home> <20110427081501.5ba28155@pluto.restena.lu> <20110427204139.1b0ea23b@neptune.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: sedat.dilek@gmail.com Cc: Bruno =?iso-8859-1?Q?Pr=E9mont?= , Thomas Gleixner , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Mike Frysinger , KOSAKI Motohiro , LKML , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, "Paul E. McKenney" , Pekka Enberg , Mike Galbraith On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:45:03AM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: > Hi, > > not sure if my problem from linux-2.6-rcu.git#sedat.2011.04.23a is > related to the issue here. > > Just FYI: > I am here on a Pentium-M (uniprocessor aka UP) and still unsure if I > have the correct (optimal?) kernel-configs set. > > Paul gave me a script to collect RCU data and I enhanced it with > collecting SCHED data. > > In the above mentionned GIT branch I applied these two extra commits > (0001 requested by Paul and 0002 proposed by Thomas): > > patches/0001-Revert-rcu-restrict-TREE_RCU-to-SMP-builds-with-PREE.patch > patches/0002-sched-Add-warning-when-RT-throttling-is-activated.patch > > Furthermore, I have added my kernel-config file, scripts, patches and > logs (also output of 'cat /proc/cpuinfo'). > > Hope this helps the experts to narrow down the problem. Yow!!! Now this one might well be able to hit the 950 millisecond limit. There are no fewer than 1,314,958 RCU callbacks queued up at the end of the test. And RCU has indeed noticed this and cranked up the number of callbacks to be handled by each invocation of rcu_do_batch() to 2,147,483,647. And only 15 seconds earlier, there were zero callbacks queued and the rcu_do_batch() limit was at the default of 10 callbacks per invocation. Thanx, Paul > Regards, > - Sedat - > > P.S.: I adapted the patch from [1] against > linux-2.6-rcu.git#sedat.2011.04.23a, but did not help here. > > [1] http://lkml.org/lkml/2011/4/22/35 -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org