2009-06-27 12:15:40

by Thomas Meyer

Subject: 2.6.31-rc1: WARNING: at mm/page_alloc.c:1743 __alloc_pages_nodemask

[ 1.516209] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[ 1.516216] WARNING: at mm/page_alloc.c:1743 __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x153/0x550()
[ 1.516218] Hardware name: MS-7250
[ 1.516219] Modules linked in:
[ 1.516223] Pid: 1, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.31-rc1 #50
[ 1.516225] Call Trace:
[ 1.516232] [<ffffffff8106c182>] ? warn_slowpath_common+0x84/0xb2
[ 1.516236] [<ffffffff81178fb8>] ? sysfs_ilookup_test+0x0/0x3b
[ 1.516239] [<ffffffff810e5ea8>] ? __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x153/0x550
[ 1.516245] [<ffffffff811131bd>] ? kmem_cache_create+0x1ac/0x30c
[ 1.516249] [<ffffffff810e6346>] ? __get_free_pages+0x22/0x77
[ 1.516253] [<ffffffff81cb5b8f>] ? dccp_init+0xeb/0x38e
[ 1.516257] [<ffffffff81cb5aa4>] ? dccp_init+0x0/0x38e
[ 1.516260] [<ffffffff8100908e>] ? do_one_initcall+0x60/0x144
[ 1.516264] [<ffffffff810c0040>] ? register_irq_proc+0xac/0xdb
[ 1.516268] [<ffffffff81c6a88f>] ? kernel_init+0x170/0x1dd
[ 1.516272] [<ffffffff8102cf8a>] ? child_rip+0xa/0x20
[ 1.516275] [<ffffffff81c6a71f>] ? kernel_init+0x0/0x1dd
[ 1.516278] [<ffffffff8102cf80>] ? child_rip+0x0/0x20
[ 1.516283] ---[ end trace 2e1baf37c897af4d ]---

2009-06-28 10:05:18

by Borislav Petkov

Subject: Re: 2.6.31-rc1: WARNING: at mm/page_alloc.c:1743 __alloc_pages_nodemask

On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 04:15:43PM +0200, Thomas Meyer wrote:
> [ 1.516209] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> [ 1.516216] WARNING: at mm/page_alloc.c:1743 __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x153/0x550()
> [ 1.516218] Hardware name: MS-7250
> [ 1.516219] Modules linked in:
> [ 1.516223] Pid: 1, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.31-rc1 #50
> [ 1.516225] Call Trace:
> [ 1.516232] [<ffffffff8106c182>] ? warn_slowpath_common+0x84/0xb2
> [ 1.516236] [<ffffffff81178fb8>] ? sysfs_ilookup_test+0x0/0x3b
> [ 1.516239] [<ffffffff810e5ea8>] ? __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x153/0x550
> [ 1.516245] [<ffffffff811131bd>] ? kmem_cache_create+0x1ac/0x30c
> [ 1.516249] [<ffffffff810e6346>] ? __get_free_pages+0x22/0x77
> [ 1.516253] [<ffffffff81cb5b8f>] ? dccp_init+0xeb/0x38e
> [ 1.516257] [<ffffffff81cb5aa4>] ? dccp_init+0x0/0x38e
> [ 1.516260] [<ffffffff8100908e>] ? do_one_initcall+0x60/0x144
> [ 1.516264] [<ffffffff810c0040>] ? register_irq_proc+0xac/0xdb
> [ 1.516268] [<ffffffff81c6a88f>] ? kernel_init+0x170/0x1dd
> [ 1.516272] [<ffffffff8102cf8a>] ? child_rip+0xa/0x20
> [ 1.516275] [<ffffffff81c6a71f>] ? kernel_init+0x0/0x1dd
> [ 1.516278] [<ffffffff8102cf80>] ? child_rip+0x0/0x20
> [ 1.516283] ---[ end trace 2e1baf37c897af4d ]---

Looks like DCCP is hitting the MAX_ORDER allocation sanity check, CCing relevant
people.

--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.