From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753751Ab1DSRLc (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 19 Apr 2011 13:11:32 -0400
Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com ([66.63.167.143]:37863 "EHLO
	bedivere.hansenpartnership.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752774Ab1DSRLb (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 19 Apr 2011 13:11:31 -0400
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm: make expand_downwards symmetrical to
 expand_upwards
From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
To: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>, David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimYrD_Sby_u-fPSwn-RJJyEVavU5w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110415135144.GE8828@tiehlicka.suse.cz>
	 <alpine.LSU.2.00.1104171952040.22679@sister.anvils>
	 <20110418100131.GD8925@tiehlicka.suse.cz>
	 <20110418135637.5baac204.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
	 <20110419111004.GE21689@tiehlicka.suse.cz>
	 <1303228009.3171.18.camel@mulgrave.site>
	 <BANLkTimYrD_Sby_u-fPSwn-RJJyEVavU5w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 12:11:28 -0500
Message-ID: <1303233088.3171.26.camel@mulgrave.site>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.1 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, 2011-04-19 at 20:05 +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> > It seems to be a random intermittent mm crash because the next reboot
> > crashed with the same trace but after the fsck had completed and the
> > third came up to the login prompt.
> 
> Looks like a genuine SLUB problem on parisc. Christoph?

Looking through the slub code, it seems to be making invalid
assumptions.  All of the node stuff is dependent on CONFIG_NUMA.
However, we're CONFIG_DISCONTIGMEM (with CONFIG_NUMA not set): on the
machines I and Dave Anglin have, our physical memory ranges are 0-1GB
and 64-65GB, so I think slub crashes when we get a page from the high
memory range ... because it's not expecting a non-zero node number.

James