Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265368AbUAAKSU (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Jan 2004 05:18:20 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265370AbUAAKSU (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Jan 2004 05:18:20 -0500 Received: from dp.samba.org ([66.70.73.150]:34480 "EHLO lists.samba.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265368AbUAAKSM (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Jan 2004 05:18:12 -0500 Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 21:15:41 +1100 From: Anton Blanchard To: Joonas Kortesalmi Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org Subject: Re: swapper: page allocation failure. order:3, mode:0x20 Message-ID: <20040101101541.GJ28023@krispykreme> References: <20040101093553.GA24788@derbian.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040101093553.GA24788@derbian.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1850 Lines: 40 Hi, > After running 2.6.0 on a server for a few days, I met an interesting and > annoying problem. I was playing with NFS over gigabit ethernet (e1000) and > it was a bit slow. I tried to find out why by running top and I saw syslog-ng > eating almost 10% of the 1,3GHz Duron. Looked at the log and there was a huge > flood of these messages: > > swapper: page allocation failure. order:3, mode:0x20 > irssi: page allocation failure. order:3, mode:0x20 > swapper: page allocation failure. order:3, mode:0x20 > vim: page allocation failure. order:3, mode:0x20 > swapper: page allocation failure. order:3, mode:0x20 Its sounds like you are using either a large MTU (9k?) or TSO. TSO causes the networking stack to think it has a massive MTU and the e1000 card busts it up into proper MTU sized packets. The problem is that it places much more stress on the allocator by asking for these large chunks of memory in interrupt context. Now e1000 uses TSO (and can regularly ask for 32kB+ kmallocs in interrupt context) perhaps we should look moving the rx buffer refill code into a context that can sleep. Then again its not like we can tolerate much latency in this code path, your rx ring will run out quite quickly :) BTW We have found increasing /proc/sys/vm/min_free_kbytes can help the situation a bit. Bumping the slab limits for the larger kmallocs (via echo X Y Z > /proc/slab) might be useful too. We should probably rate limit that printk. Andrew: I was thinking of stealing net_ratelimit and calling it core_ratelimit or whatever. Then wrap these non critical things with it. Overkill? Anton - 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/