From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262570AbVF2M6v (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jun 2005 08:58:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262569AbVF2M5v (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jun 2005 08:57:51 -0400 Received: from mailfe05.swip.net ([212.247.154.129]:20371 "EHLO swip.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262570AbVF2M5V (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jun 2005 08:57:21 -0400 X-T2-Posting-ID: jLUmkBjoqvly7NM6d2gdCg== Subject: Re: oom-killings, but I'm not out of memory! From: Alexander Nyberg To: Anthony DiSante Cc: andrea@suse.de, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel In-Reply-To: <42C18031.50206@nodivisions.com> References: <42C179D5.3040603@nodivisions.com> <1119977073.1723.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <42C18031.50206@nodivisions.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 14:57:15 +0200 Message-Id: <1120049835.1176.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > >>I'm running a 2.6.11 kernel. I have 1 gig of RAM and 1 gig of swap. Lately > >>when my RAM gets full, the oom-killer takes out either Mozilla or > >>Thunderbird (my two biggest memory hogs), even though my swap space is only > >>20% full. I still have ~800 MB of free swap space, so shouldn't the kernel > >>push Moz or T-bird into swap instead of oom-killing it? At their maximum > >>memory-hogging capacity, neither Moz nor T-bird is ever using more than 200 MB. > >> > > You cut out the important part where it printed out memory usage > > information at the time of the OOM, please post it > > > > Oops. I left that out because it line-wrapped so bad, and I didn't realize > it was important. Here it is: > > ... oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x80d2 > ... DMA per-cpu: > ... cpu 0 hot: low 2, high 6, batch 1 > ... cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 2, batch 1 > ... Normal per-cpu: > ... cpu 0 hot: low 32, high 96, batch 16 > ... cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 32, batch 16 > ... HighMem per-cpu: > ... cpu 0 hot: low 14, high 42, batch 7 > ... cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 14, batch 7 > ... > ... Free pages: 12536kB (112kB HighMem) > ... Active:240797 inactive:2399 dirty:0 writeback:0 unstable:0 free:3134 > slab:7144 mapped:240597 pagetables:1073 > ... DMA free:4096kB min:68kB low:84kB high:100kB active:8260kB inactive:0kB > present:16384kB pages_scanned:9052 all_unreclaimable? yes > ... lowmem_reserve[]: 0 880 1007 > ... Normal free:8328kB min:3756kB low:4692kB high:5632kB active:827084kB > inactive:9468kB present:901120kB pages_scanned:23361 all_unreclaimable? no > ... lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 1023 > ... HighMem free:112kB min:128kB low:160kB high:192kB active:127844kB > inactive:128kB present:131008kB pages_scanned:135459 all_unreclaimable? yes > ... lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0 > ... DMA: 0*4kB 28*8kB 16*16kB 1*32kB 0*64kB 0*128kB 0*256kB 1*512kB 1*1024kB > 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 4096kB > ... Normal: 98*4kB 16*8kB 216*16kB 18*32kB 1*64kB 1*128kB 0*256kB 1*512kB > 1*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 8328kB > ... HighMem: 0*4kB 2*8kB 2*16kB 0*32kB 1*64kB 0*128kB 0*256kB 0*512kB > 0*1024kB 0*2048kB 0*4096kB = 112kB > ... Swap cache: add 166973, delete 149202, find 1714386/1723885, race 0+0 > ... Free swap = 781012kB > ... Total swap = 987988kB > ... Out of Memory: Killed process 30787 (thunderbird-bin). > ... Out of Memory: Killed process 18112 (thunderbird-bin). > ... Out of Memory: Killed process 18116 (thunderbird-bin). > ... Out of Memory: Killed process 18117 (thunderbird-bin). > ... Out of Memory: Killed process 18119 (thunderbird-bin). > ... Out of Memory: Killed process 8857 (thunderbird-bin). Yeah this indeed looks strange. gfp_mask == GFP_HIGHUSER | __GFP_ZERO iirc Andrea fixing up some all_unreclaimable bug in 2.6.11 but this looks like that for some reason it didn't go into the Normal zone which has plenty of free pages...