Re: swapper: page allocation failure. order:2, mode:0x4020 in 2.6.27

From: KOSAKI Motohiro
Date: Wed Jan 07 2009 - 20:19:53 EST

Next message: James Morris: "Re: [PATCH] Security: Implement and document RLIMIT_NETWORK."
Previous message: David Miller: "[GIT]: Sparc"
In reply to: Maurice Volaski: "swapper: page allocation failure. order:2, mode:0x4020 in 2.6.27"
Next in thread: Evgeniy Polyakov: "Re: swapper: page allocation failure. order:2, mode:0x4020 in 2.6.27"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Hi

(cc to netdev)

> Just started with 2.6.27-gentoo-r7 (I think gentoo may have patches
> from 2.6.28) on an x64 system and during an apparently idle time, I
> saw this:
>
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255843] swapper: page allocation
> failure. order:2, mode:0x4020
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255851] Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not
> tainted 2.6.27-gentoo-r7 #3
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255854]
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255854] Call Trace:
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255857] <IRQ> [<ffffffff81076bbf>]
> __alloc_pages_internal+0x41a/0x439
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255872] [<ffffffff8126575c>] ?
> __netdev_alloc_skb+0x1d/0x39
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255875] [<ffffffff81076c4c>]
> __get_free_pages+0x17/0x56
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255879] [<ffffffff8109632b>]
> __kmalloc_track_caller+0x3b/0xbb
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255882] [<ffffffff81264d87>]
> __alloc_skb+0x66/0x12c
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255885] [<ffffffff8126575c>]
> __netdev_alloc_skb+0x1d/0x39
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255899] [<ffffffffa00d203c>]
> tg3_alloc_rx_skb+0xd1/0x195 [tg3]

if stack dump has tg3_alloc_rx_skb(), that isn't bug. (maybe)
tg3 network card often reqire non order-0 pages under irq/softirq context.

but linux memory manager can't drop any cache under irq/softirq context.
therefore the allocation failure is relatively typical.

the allocation failure in packet receive (tg3_alloc_rx_skb) cause
packet dropping and network peer resend the same packet.
it decrease network performance a bit. but it doesn't cause any serious problem.

last problem is, why we should look this false-positive warning repeatedly.

net-guys, if I say false thing, please fix.

> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255906] [<ffffffffa00d9eb2>]
> tg3_poll+0x563/0xa68 [tg3]
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255910] [<ffffffff8104b567>] ?
> clockevents_program_event+0x73/0x7c
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255914] [<ffffffff81268608>]
> net_rx_action+0xd3/0x1d0
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255917] [<ffffffff81268597>] ?
> net_rx_action+0x62/0x1d0
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255921] [<ffffffff81035222>]
> __do_softirq+0x6d/0xdd
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255925] [<ffffffff8100d2cc>]
> call_softirq+0x1c/0x28
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255928] [<ffffffff8100e405>]
> do_softirq+0x34/0x72
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255931] [<ffffffff81034f54>]
> irq_exit+0x3f/0x82
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255933] [<ffffffff8100e6ee>]
> do_IRQ+0x146/0x168
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255936] [<ffffffff8100c541>]
> ret_from_intr+0x0/0xa
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255938] <EOI> [<ffffffff812dd3cc>]
> ? __atomic_notifier_call_chain+0x0/0x87
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255947] [<ffffffff81012593>] ?
> default_idle+0x2b/0x40
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255950] [<ffffffff8100b041>] ?
> enter_idle+0x22/0x24
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255952] [<ffffffff8100b0d3>] ?
> cpu_idle+0x90/0xd8
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255956] [<ffffffff812d4ce7>] ?
> start_secondary+0x155/0x159
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255958]
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255959] Mem-Info:
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255961] DMA per-cpu:
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255963] CPU 0: hi: 0, btch: 1 usd: 0
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255965] CPU 1: hi: 0, btch: 1 usd: 0
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255967] DMA32 per-cpu:
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255968] CPU 0: hi: 186, btch: 31 usd: 126
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255970] CPU 1: hi: 186, btch: 31 usd: 148
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255972] Normal per-cpu:
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255973] CPU 0: hi: 186, btch: 31 usd: 181
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255975] CPU 1: hi: 186, btch: 31 usd: 183
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255978] Active:218402
> inactive:819867 dirty:27016 writeback:0 unstable:0
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255980] free:44839 slab:151548
> mapped:5449 pagetables:2110 bounce:0
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255983] DMA free:5328kB min:4kB
> low:4kB high:4kB active:0kB inactive:0kB present:4256kB
> pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? yes
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255986] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 3480 5484 5484
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255991] DMA32 free:169860kB
> min:6008kB low:7508kB high:9012kB active:433812kB inactive:1876764kB
> present:3563808kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255993] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 2004 2004
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.255998] Normal free:4168kB
> min:3460kB low:4324kB high:5188kB active:439796kB inactive:1402704kB
> present:2052096kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.256000] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0 0
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.256004] DMA: 2*4kB 3*8kB 5*16kB
> 5*32kB 3*64kB 4*128kB 3*256kB 1*512kB 1*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB =
> 5328kB
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.256012] DMA32: 42208*4kB 0*8kB
> 12*16kB 3*32kB 0*64kB 1*128kB 0*256kB 1*512kB 0*1024kB 0*2048kB
> 0*4096kB = 169760kB
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.256020] Normal: 914*4kB 1*8kB 2*16kB
> 1*32kB 1*64kB 1*128kB 1*256kB 0*512kB 0*1024kB 0*2048kB 0*4096kB =
> 4176kB
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.256029] 1015437 total pagecache pages
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.256031] 0 pages in swap cache
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.256032] Swap cache stats: add 0,
> delete 0, find 0/0
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.256034] Free swap = 0kB
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.256035] Total swap = 0kB
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.285015] 1572848 pages RAM
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.285015] 170874 pages reserved
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.285015] 986700 pages shared
> Jan 6 23:20:19 [kernel] [358105.285015] 411152 pages non-shared
> --
>
> Maurice Volaski, mvolaski@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Computing Support, Rose F. Kennedy Center
> Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

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

Next message: James Morris: "Re: [PATCH] Security: Implement and document RLIMIT_NETWORK."
Previous message: David Miller: "[GIT]: Sparc"
In reply to: Maurice Volaski: "swapper: page allocation failure. order:2, mode:0x4020 in 2.6.27"
Next in thread: Evgeniy Polyakov: "Re: swapper: page allocation failure. order:2, mode:0x4020 in 2.6.27"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]