xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Page allocation failure writing to an XFS volume via NFS on CentOS 4

To: Luca Maranzano <liuk001@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Page allocation failure writing to an XFS volume via NFS on CentOS 4.3
From: Shailendra Tripathi <stripathi@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 17:59:36 +0530
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <68559cef0607240449m5005231t78f05673bb8309e2@mail.gmail.com>
References: <68559cef0607210519q9f382c6n7104bef9cf9716f3@mail.gmail.com> <20060721161326.GE12347@tuatara.stupidest.org> <68559cef0607240449m5005231t78f05673bb8309e2@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (X11/20041127)
Hi Luca,
Almost all of your memory is being used for page cache which is good definitely for any I/O intensive applications. When you set min_free_kbytes to a very low number, it means that the pages used for various things (slab, cached pages) are not started to get cleaned up until it goes down to a very low level. So, it is true that memory allocation might fail if you set to to very low number


/proc/meminfo:
MemTotal:      1035832 kB
MemFree:         12568 kB
Buffers:         10468 kB
Cached:         968336 kB
SwapCached:       4716 kB

However, there is another culprit here. The memory cleaner code should typically avoid doing memory allocation in cleanup path; otherwise it may fail. dm_mod is splitting the bio and, hence, requires the page allocation which is definitely bad in such circumstances where memory is chewed up to the last pages. It so happened the bio_alloc pool was empty and required to be filled up.
For now, you should set min_free_kbytes to at least 8*1024 and preferably to [16-20] * 1024.
As far as XFS memory messages are concerned, those message are indicating that the memory is either running low or so fragmented that the requested page order could not be allocated in reasonable time.


kswapd0: page allocation failure. order:0, mode:0xd0
[<c014c48d>] __alloc_pages+0x2e1/0x2f7
[<c014c4bb>] __get_free_pages+0x18/0x24
[<c014f9a2>] kmem_getpages+0x15/0x94
[<c015065f>] cache_grow+0x107/0x233
[<c0150982>] cache_alloc_refill+0x1f7/0x227
[<c0150bf4>] kmem_cache_alloc+0x46/0x4c --> Memory allocation request for bio_alloc pool.
[<c014ac4d>] mempool_alloc+0xb6/0x1f9
[<c011e867>] autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x2d
[<c011e867>] autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x2d
[<f8aa86ea>] EmsPlatformCreateIo+0x2a/0x60 [emcp]
[<f8aa8978>] allocPio+0x18/0x40 [emcp]
[<f8aa89e7>] emcp_pseudo_mrf+0x27/0x60 [emcp]
[<c02518a6>] generic_make_request+0x190/0x1a0
[<c016dff5>] bio_clone+0x8b/0xa3
[<f8873370>] __map_bio+0x34/0xb4 [dm_mod]
[<f8873579>] __clone_and_map+0xc3/0x2c9 [dm_mod]
[<c014c35d>] __alloc_pages+0x1b1/0x2f7
[<f8873829>] __split_bio+0xaa/0x108 [dm_mod]
[<f8873965>] dm_request+0xde/0xf1 [dm_mod]
[<c02518a6>] generic_make_request+0x190/0x1a0
[<c011e867>] autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x2d
[<c025195a>] submit_bio+0xa4/0xac
[<c016de25>] bio_alloc+0x100/0x168
[<c016d7da>] submit_bh+0x13e/0x163
[<f93a4d6d>] xfs_submit_page+0x84/0xa8 [xfs]
[<f93a4f71>] xfs_convert_page+0x1e0/0x1f4 [xfs]
[<f93a4fbe>] xfs_cluster_write+0x39/0x43 [xfs]
[<f93a5488>] xfs_page_state_convert+0x4c0/0x50c [xfs]
[<f93a598a>] linvfs_writepage+0x91/0xc6 [xfs]
[<c0152fac>] pageout+0x88/0xc5
[<c01531f2>] shrink_list+0x209/0x4ea
[<c01536d2>] shrink_cache+0x1ff/0x454
[<c0152d91>] shrink_slab+0x7d/0x14c
[<c015408c>] shrink_zone+0x8f/0x9e
[<c015442f>] balance_pgdat+0x197/0x2cb --> Cleaner code



Regards, Shailendra

Luca Maranzano wrote:
Could it be an issue about the min_free_kbytes kernel parameter?

On my server its current value is 957, but I've read that this could
lead to kernel memory allocation failure even if there is actually
enough RAM available.

Since my trouble seem to be correlated to NFS access, could it be an
interaction between network and disk I/O to trigger this problem?

Thanks again.
Regards,
Luca


On 7/21/06, Chris Wedgwood <cw@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 02:19:34PM +0200, Luca Maranzano wrote:

> kswapd0: page allocation failure. order:0, mode:0xd0

you're out of memory, see what's being so piggy





<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>