Re: __alloc_pages: 0-order allocation failed (Jes Sorensen)

Re: __alloc_pages: 0-order allocation failed (Jes Sorensen)

[Abu M. Muttalib]

Hi,

I have somewhat related problem as mentioned in my previous mail.

I was running one application on a linux-2.4.19-rmk7-pxa1 box with 16 MB RAM
and 16 MB flash. It was all working fine.

I am now trying to run the same application on a linux-2.6.13 box and
intermittently I get OOM-KILLER and killing of a required process. What has
changed between these two kernel version?

Please help.

Thanks and regards,
Abu.

Date: 01 Jun 2006 08:19:32 -0400
From: Jes Sorensen <jes@sgi.com>
Subject: Re: __alloc_pages: 0-order allocation failed
To: Oliver K?nig <k.oliver@t-online.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Message-ID: <yq0d5dtt6ej.fsf@jaguar.mkp.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=latin-iso8859-15

>>>>> "Oliver" == Oliver K?nig <k.oliver@t-online.de> writes:

Oliver> I run Debian 3.1 (Sarge) with Debian-Kernel 2.4.27-3-686-smp
Oliver> on Dell Poweredge 2850 with the following setup/config:

Oliver> Model: Dell Poweredge 2850 CPU: 2x3.0 GHz RAM: 2 GB SWAP: 1 GB
Oliver> Raid 1 with Dell PowerEdge Expandable RAID controller 4 (SCSI)
Oliver> Kernel: 2.4.27-3-686-smp (CONFIG_HIGHMEM4G=y) Web server:
Oliver> apache2 SQL server: mysql4.1 MTA: exim4

[snip]

Oliver> The server is then so slow tom react that the only way to get
Oliver> rid of the problem is to reset the server.

Oliver> What can we do to fix the problem?

0-order allocations means it cannot get even a single page of free
memory. You also see in the log the the OOM is kicking in. In other
words, totally out of memory.

You have two options, add more swap or add more memory. At the same
time it might be a good idea to try and monitor it to find out which
tasks are chewing away that much memory.

Cheers,
Jes
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: __alloc_pages: 0-order allocation failed (Jes Sorensen)

[Erik Mouw]

On Fri, Jun 02, 2006 at 05:44:38PM +0530, Abu M. Muttalib wrote:
> I was running one application on a linux-2.4.19-rmk7-pxa1 box with 16 MB RAM
> and 16 MB flash. It was all working fine.
> 
> I am now trying to run the same application on a linux-2.6.13 box and
> intermittently I get OOM-KILLER and killing of a required process. What has
> changed between these two kernel version?

Most of the VM subsystem, why do you ask...?

Try to recreate the problem with a more recent 2.6 kernel and post a
the kernel messages.


Erik

-- 
+-- Erik Mouw -- www.harddisk-recovery.com -- +31 70 370 12 90 --
| Lab address: Delftechpark 26, 2628 XH, Delft, The Netherlands

RE: __alloc_pages: 0-order allocation failed (Jes Sorensen)

[Abu M. Muttalib]

Hi,

Thanks for your reply.

I anticipated that my application which was running perfectly on
linux-2.4.19-rmk7-pxa1 box will run as it is on linux-2.6.13 box as well.
But alas, this is not the case and I fail to understand why it is so? ;-(

~Abu.

-----Original Message-----
From: Erik Mouw [mailto:erik@zurix.bitwizard.nl]On Behalf Of Erik Mouw
Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 5:50 PM
To: Abu M. Muttalib
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; k.oliver@t-online.de; jes@sgi.com
Subject: Re: __alloc_pages: 0-order allocation failed (Jes Sorensen)


On Fri, Jun 02, 2006 at 05:44:38PM +0530, Abu M. Muttalib wrote:
> I was running one application on a linux-2.4.19-rmk7-pxa1 box with 16 MB
RAM
> and 16 MB flash. It was all working fine.
>
> I am now trying to run the same application on a linux-2.6.13 box and
> intermittently I get OOM-KILLER and killing of a required process. What
has
> changed between these two kernel version?

Most of the VM subsystem, why do you ask...?

Try to recreate the problem with a more recent 2.6 kernel and post a
the kernel messages.


Erik

--
+-- Erik Mouw -- www.harddisk-recovery.com -- +31 70 370 12 90 --
| Lab address: Delftechpark 26, 2628 XH, Delft, The Netherlands

Re: __alloc_pages: 0-order allocation failed (Jes Sorensen)

[Erik Mouw]

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

A: No.
Q: Should I leave quotations after my reply?

On Fri, Jun 02, 2006 at 07:00:26PM +0530, Abu M. Muttalib wrote:
> I anticipated that my application which was running perfectly on
> linux-2.4.19-rmk7-pxa1 box will run as it is on linux-2.6.13 box as well.
> But alas, this is not the case and I fail to understand why it is so? ;-(

I can't tell you. I don't have the source of your application and I my
crystal ball is getting old so I can't read the kernel messages from
your screen.

Anyway, try to recreate the problem with a *recent* 2.6 kernel. If you
can still recreate your problem, post a log over here.


Erik

-- 
+-- Erik Mouw -- www.harddisk-recovery.com -- +31 70 370 12 90 --
| Lab address: Delftechpark 26, 2628 XH, Delft, The Netherlands

Re: __alloc_pages: 0-order allocation failed (Jes Sorensen)

[Jes Sorensen]

>>>>> "Erik" == Erik Mouw <erik@harddisk-recovery.com> writes:

Erik> A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read
Erik> text.  Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?  A: Top-posting.
Erik> Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

Erik> A: No.  Q: Should I leave quotations after my reply?

RFC 1855 pops to mind here :)

Jes