From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932399AbWEMMNK (ORCPT ); Sat, 13 May 2006 08:13:10 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932402AbWEMMNK (ORCPT ); Sat, 13 May 2006 08:13:10 -0400 Received: from [83.101.159.136] ([83.101.159.136]:55051 "EHLO raad.intranet") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932399AbWEMMNJ (ORCPT ); Sat, 13 May 2006 08:13:09 -0400 From: Al Boldi To: Mike Galbraith Subject: Re: swapping and oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x201d2, order=0 Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 15:11:05 +0300 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <200605111514.45503.a1426z@gawab.com> <200605121517.59988.a1426z@gawab.com> <1147447913.7520.6.camel@homer> In-Reply-To: <1147447913.7520.6.camel@homer> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1256" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200605131511.05723.a1426z@gawab.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Fri, 2006-05-12 at 15:17 +0300, Al Boldi wrote: > > Note that this is not specific to mem=8M, but rather a general oom > > observation even for mem=4G, where it is only much later to occur. > > An oom situation with 4G ram would be more interesting than this one. Agreed, but can you tell me what readahead has to do with this oom? oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x201d2, order=0 [] out_of_memory+0xa5/0xc0 [] __alloc_pages+0x279/0x310 [] __do_page_cache_readahead+0xe9/0x120 [] max_sane_readahead+0x2f/0x50 [] filemap_nopage+0x2eb/0x370 [] do_no_page+0x65/0x220 [] __handle_mm_fault+0xec/0x200 [] do_page_fault+0x188/0x5c5 [] do_page_fault+0x0/0x5c5 [] error_code+0x4f/0x54 Thanks! -- Al