Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1753515AbZGNFqx@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753515AbZGNFqx (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 14 Jul 2009 01:46:53 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753441AbZGNFqw
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Tue, 14 Jul 2009 01:46:52 -0400
Received: from mail-yx0-f184.google.com ([209.85.210.184]:45445 "EHLO
	mail-yx0-f184.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753415AbZGNFqv convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 14 Jul 2009 01:46:51 -0400
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=TjYU/7cdzM17xhy0fXQFdR73AXYSfjwZ9r70E6e5fqJkzvcFy7du+vHJvlx3twXZiJ
         nuQVaAzR9lGHh9oMk2A3GPwph36GCgyzud6EqIKkg3CHhEBU1NrPVpxe4ybNxja5eTd/
         GUJP/B83YksW4TZvfLoQ4fGmKpxRb65RzmFjY=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20090713134621.124aa18e.skraw@ithnet.com>
References: <20090713134621.124aa18e.skraw@ithnet.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 22:40:39 -0700
Message-ID: <4807377b0907132240g6f74c9cbnf1302d354a0e0a72@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: What to do with this message (2.6.30.1) ?
From: Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@gmail.com>
To: Stephan von Krawczynski <skraw@ithnet.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 5687
Lines: 79

On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 4:46 AM, Stephan von Krawczynski
<skraw@ithnet.com> wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> first day of using 2.6.30.1 on a box that mostly accepts rsync connections
> revealed this message. This is in fact not the only one of this type. Quite
> a lot from other processes follow. What can I do to prevent that? Is that
> a kind of a bug?
> I did not experience that on a box with the same job using tg3 instead of
> e1000e.
>
> Jul 13 01:10:57 backup kernel: swapper: page allocation failure. order:0, mode:0x20
> Jul 13 01:10:57 backup kernel: Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.30.1 #3
> Jul 13 01:10:57 backup kernel: Call Trace:
> Jul 13 01:10:57 backup kernel: ?<IRQ> ?[<ffffffff80269182>] ? __alloc_pages_internal+0x3df/0x3ff
> Jul 13 01:10:57 backup kernel: ?[<ffffffff802876cf>] ? cache_alloc_refill+0x25e/0x4a0
> Jul 13 01:10:57 backup kernel: ?[<ffffffff803eb067>] ? sock_def_readable+0x10/0x62
> Jul 13 01:10:57 backup kernel: ?[<ffffffff8028798a>] ? __kmalloc+0x79/0xa1
> Jul 13 01:10:57 backup kernel: ?[<ffffffff803ef98a>] ? __alloc_skb+0x5c/0x12a
> Jul 13 01:10:57 backup kernel: ?[<ffffffff803f0558>] ? __netdev_alloc_skb+0x15/0x2f
> Jul 13 01:10:57 backup kernel: ?[<ffffffffa000cda0>] ? e1000_alloc_rx_buffers+0x8c/0x248 [e1000e]
> Jul 13 01:10:57 backup kernel: ?[<ffffffffa000d262>] ? e1000_clean_rx_irq+0x2a2/0x2db [e1000e]
> Jul 13 01:10:57 backup kernel: ?[<ffffffffa000e8dc>] ? e1000_clean+0x70/0x219 [e1000e]
> Jul 13 01:10:57 backup kernel: ?[<ffffffff803f3adf>] ? net_rx_action+0x69/0x11f
> Jul 13 01:10:58 backup kernel: ?[<ffffffff802373eb>] ? __do_softirq+0x66/0xf7
> Jul 13 01:10:58 backup kernel: ?[<ffffffff8020bebc>] ? call_softirq+0x1c/0x28
> Jul 13 01:10:58 backup kernel: ?[<ffffffff8020d680>] ? do_softirq+0x2c/0x68
> Jul 13 01:10:58 backup kernel: ?[<ffffffff8020cf62>] ? do_IRQ+0xa9/0xbf
> Jul 13 01:10:58 backup kernel: ?[<ffffffff8020b793>] ? ret_from_intr+0x0/0xa
> Jul 13 01:10:58 backup kernel: ?<EOI> ?[<ffffffff802116d8>] ? mwait_idle+0x6e/0x73
> Jul 13 01:10:58 backup kernel: ?[<ffffffff802116d8>] ? mwait_idle+0x6e/0x73
> Jul 13 01:10:58 backup kernel: ?[<ffffffff8020a1cb>] ? cpu_idle+0x40/0x7c
> Jul 13 01:10:58 backup kernel: ?[<ffffffff805a7bb0>] ? start_kernel+0x31e/0x32a
> Jul 13 01:10:58 backup kernel: ?[<ffffffff805a737e>] ? x86_64_start_kernel+0xe5/0xeb
> Jul 13 01:10:58 backup kernel: DMA per-cpu:
> Jul 13 01:10:58 backup kernel: CPU ? ?0: hi: ? ?0, btch: ? 1 usd: ? 0
> Jul 13 01:10:58 backup kernel: CPU ? ?1: hi: ? ?0, btch: ? 1 usd: ? 0
> Jul 13 01:10:58 backup kernel: CPU ? ?2: hi: ? ?0, btch: ? 1 usd: ? 0
> Jul 13 01:10:58 backup kernel: CPU ? ?3: hi: ? ?0, btch: ? 1 usd: ? 0
> Jul 13 01:10:58 backup kernel: DMA32 per-cpu:
> Jul 13 01:10:58 backup kernel: CPU ? ?0: hi: ?186, btch: ?31 usd: 130
> Jul 13 01:10:58 backup kernel: CPU ? ?1: hi: ?186, btch: ?31 usd: ?90
> Jul 13 01:10:59 backup kernel: CPU ? ?2: hi: ?186, btch: ?31 usd: 142
> Jul 13 01:10:59 backup kernel: CPU ? ?3: hi: ?186, btch: ?31 usd: 177
> Jul 13 01:10:59 backup kernel: Normal per-cpu:
> Jul 13 01:10:59 backup kernel: CPU ? ?0: hi: ?186, btch: ?31 usd: ?76
> Jul 13 01:10:59 backup kernel: CPU ? ?1: hi: ?186, btch: ?31 usd: 160
> Jul 13 01:10:59 backup kernel: CPU ? ?2: hi: ?186, btch: ?31 usd: 170
> Jul 13 01:10:59 backup kernel: CPU ? ?3: hi: ?186, btch: ?31 usd: 165
> Jul 13 01:10:59 backup kernel: Active_anon:117688 active_file:169003 inactive_anon:22048
> Jul 13 01:10:59 backup kernel: ?inactive_file:1425813 unevictable:0 dirty:337125 writeback:4493 unstable:0
> Jul 13 01:10:59 backup kernel: ?free:8260 slab:297474 mapped:1475 pagetables:1685 bounce:0
> Jul 13 01:11:00 backup kernel: DMA free:11712kB min:12kB low:12kB high:16kB active_anon:0kB inactive_anon:0kB active_file:0kB inactive_file:0kB unevictable:0kB present:10756kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? yes
> Jul 13 01:11:00 backup kernel: lowmem_reserve[]: 0 3767 8059 8059
> Jul 13 01:11:00 backup kernel: DMA32 free:19060kB min:5364kB low:6704kB high:8044kB active_anon:180632kB inactive_anon:38496kB active_file:318456kB inactive_file:2581460kB unevictable:0kB present:3857440kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no
> Jul 13 01:11:00 backup kernel: lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 4292 4292
> Jul 13 01:11:00 backup kernel: Normal free:2268kB min:6112kB low:7640kB high:9168kB active_anon:290120kB inactive_anon:49696kB active_file:357556kB inactive_file:3121792kB unevictable:0kB present:4395520kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no
> Jul 13 01:11:00 backup kernel: lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0 0
> Jul 13 01:11:00 backup kernel: DMA: 6*4kB 3*8kB 3*16kB 3*32kB 4*64kB 2*128kB 1*256kB 1*512kB 2*1024kB 0*2048kB 2*4096kB = 11712kB
> Jul 13 01:11:00 backup kernel: DMA32: 2720*4kB 2*8kB 1*16kB 0*32kB 1*64kB 1*128kB 1*256kB 1*512kB 1*1024kB 1*2048kB 1*4096kB = 19040kB
> Jul 13 01:11:00 backup kernel: Normal: 1*4kB 1*8kB 1*16kB 1*32kB 0*64kB 1*128kB 0*256kB 0*512kB 0*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 2236kB
> Jul 13 01:11:00 backup kernel: 1594864 total pagecache pages
> Jul 13 01:11:00 backup kernel: 9 pages in swap cache
> Jul 13 01:11:00 backup kernel: Swap cache stats: add 1047, delete 1038, find 0/0
> Jul 13 01:11:00 backup kernel: Free swap ?= 2100300kB
> Jul 13 01:11:00 backup kernel: Total swap = 2104488kB

Try increasing /proc/sys/vm/min_free_kbytes

can you show some more of the messages?  I'm guessing you should
include linux-mm next time (I did this time)

are you running jumbo frames perhaps?
--
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/