Re: Memory Problem in 2.4.10-pre2 / __alloc_pages failed

[Roger Larsson <roger.larsson@skelleftea.mail.telia.com>]

On Wednesdayen den 29 August 2001 14:07, Stephan von Krawczynski wrote:

> Aug 29 13:43:34 admin kernel: __alloc_pages: 2-order allocation failed
> (gfp=0x20/0). Aug 29 13:43:34 admin kernel: pid=1207;
> __alloc_pages(gfp=0x20, order=2, ...) 
> Aug 29 13:43:34 admin kernel: Call Trace: [_alloc_pages+22/24] 
> [__get_free_pages+10/24] [<fdcec845>]
> [<fdcec913>] [<fdceb7d7>] [<fdcec0f5>] [<fdcea589>]
> [ip_local_deliver_finish+0/368]
I think this is the okfn parameter to nf_hook_slow below (0/368).
And that skb_linearize(skp, GFP_ATOMIC) is much more likely candidate
especially since it calls kmalloc...

Why does skb_linearize need to be GFP_ATOMIC? Lets see, furter down we have
do_softirq... hmm.. not good to sleep in...

Next question: do we really need to linearize?

Third question: order of the package is 2 => 4096 << 2 = 16k quite big
for a packet... (MRU MTU network settings?)

> [nf_hook_slow+272/404]
> [ip_rcv_finish+0/480] [ip_local_deliver+436/444] 
> [ip_local_deliver_finish+0/368] [ip_rcv_finish+0/480]
> [ip_rcv_finish+413/480] [ip_rcv_finish+0/480] [nf_hook_slow+272/404]
> [ip_rcv+870/944] [ip_rcv_finish+0/480] [net_rx_action+362/628] 
> [do_softirq+111/204] [do_IRQ+219/236] [ret_from_intr+0/7] 
> [sys_ioctl+443/532] [system_call+51/56]

>
> Unfortunately I cannot tell what pid 1207 is, for it is gone when I do a ps
> afterwards.

Change the printout of 'current->pid' to 'current->comm' format '%s'

> This test setup shows vm errors on every 2.4 I tested so far,
> but on various occasions, all 2.4 below 10-pre1 fail during reading /
> writing. All 10-pre-x fail afterwards. If I can provide additional
> information please tell me. I am very willing to test anything you like
> with chances it doesn't corrupt my filesystems ;-) 

No guarantees...

/RogerL

-- 
Roger Larsson
Skellefteå
Sweden