Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 3 Jun 2002 04:09:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 3 Jun 2002 04:09:44 -0400 Received: from mail.loewe-komp.de ([62.156.155.230]:25354 "EHLO mail.loewe-komp.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 3 Jun 2002 04:09:43 -0400 Message-ID: <3CFB24BA.4000404@loewe-komp.de> Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2002 10:11:38 +0200 From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?W=E4chtler?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.8) Gecko/20020204 X-Accept-Language: de, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrea Arcangeli CC: Andreas Hartmann , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Memory management in Kernel 2.4.x In-Reply-To:

<3CF23893.207@loewe-komp.de> <20020531211951.GZ1172@dualathlon.random> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > On Mon, May 27, 2002 at 03:45:55PM +0200, Peter W?chtler wrote: > >>Andreas Hartmann wrote: >> >>>Zwane Mwaikambo wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>On Mon, 27 May 2002, Andreas Hartmann wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>rsync allocates all of the memory the machine has (256 MB RAM, 128 MB >>>>>swap). When this occures, processes get killed like described in the >>>>>posting before. The machine doesn't respond as long as the rsync - >>>>>process isn't killed, because it fetches all the memory which gets free >>>>>after a process has been killed. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>And the rsync process never gets singled out? nice! >>>> >>>> >>>Until it's killed by the kernel (if overcommitment isn't deactivated). If >>>overcommitment is deactivated, the services of the machine are dead >>>forever. There will be nothing, which kills such a process. Or am I wrong? >>> >>> >>There is still the oom killer (Out Of Memory). >>But it doesn't trigger and the machine pages "forever". >>Usually kswapd eats the CPU then, discarding and reloading pages, >>searching lists for pages to evict and so on. >> > > can you reproduce with 2.4.19pre9aa2? I expect at least the deadlock > (if it's a deadlock and not a livelock) should go away. > > Also I read in another email that somebody grown the per-socket buffer > to hundred mbytes, if you do that on a 32bit arch with highmem you'll > run into troubles, too much ZONE_NORMAL ram will be constantly pinned > for the tcp pipeline and the machine can enter livelocks. > Sorry for the confusion. I was just trying to explain that without overcommitment there would be the "normal" OOM handling. But I don't know this feature from the -ac kernels. Am I wrong? It's Andreas who has the problem with rsync being killed and the machine seems to hang. But I still think that the buffer cache has to be better restricted. The vm is caching far too aggressively (but I never tried with -aa) - 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/