From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com>
Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25])
	by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id
	p3RNCxuZ236270 for <xfs@oss.sgi.com>; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 18:12:59 -0500
Received: from mail-ww0-f41.google.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 30A8641A6B2
	for <xfs@oss.sgi.com>; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 16:16:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ww0-f41.google.com (mail-ww0-f41.google.com
	[74.125.82.41]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id sZQdaWB6oUjQEXsR
	for <xfs@oss.sgi.com>; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 16:16:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wwi18 with SMTP id 18so3834381wwi.2
	for <xfs@oss.sgi.com>; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 16:16:29 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20110427102824.GI12436@dastard>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.01.1104211841510.18728@trent.utfs.org>
	<20110424234655.GC12436@dastard>
	<alpine.DEB.2.01.1104242245090.18728@trent.utfs.org>
	<alpine.DEB.2.01.1104250015480.18728@trent.utfs.org>
	<20110427022655.GE12436@dastard>
	<alpine.DEB.2.01.1104270042510.18728@trent.utfs.org>
	<20110427102824.GI12436@dastard>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 08:16:29 +0900
Message-ID: <BANLkTimDoZueDWqB_LBndqPorCnTOZkNYQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: 2.6.39-rc4+: oom-killer busy killing tasks
From: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI <xfs.oss.sgi.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/options/xfs>,
	<mailto:xfs-request@oss.sgi.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://oss.sgi.com/pipermail/xfs>
List-Post: <mailto:xfs@oss.sgi.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xfs-request@oss.sgi.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs>,
	<mailto:xfs-request@oss.sgi.com?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com
Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, xfs@oss.sgi.com

On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 7:28 PM, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 12:46:51AM -0700, Christian Kujau wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 at 12:26, Dave Chinner wrote:
>> > What this shows is that VFS inode cache memory usage increases until
>> > about the 550 sample mark before the VM starts to reclaim it with
>> > extreme prejudice. At that point, I'd expect the XFS inode cache to
>> > then shrink, and it doesn't. I've got no idea why the either the
>>
>> Do you remember any XFS changes past 2.6.38 that could be related to
>> something like this?
>
> There's plenty of changes that coul dbe the cause - we've changed
> the inode reclaim to run in the background out of a workqueue as
> well as via the shrinker, so it could even be workqueue starvation
> causing the the problem...

RCU free starvation is another possibility?
https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/4/25/124

-- 
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs