Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1544090
| From | Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: OOM: Better, but still there on |
| Date | 2016-12-18 06:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sPC37-3fE-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <sP5JT-7j4-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <sPaJz-282-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <sPmUq-1Bf-19@gated-at.bofh.it> <sPotb-2qh-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <sPuoW-6rm-21@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
Nils Holland wrote: > On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 11:44:45PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > > On 2016/12/17 21:59, Nils Holland wrote: > > > On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 01:02:03AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > >> mount -t tracefs none /debug/trace > > >> echo 1 > /debug/trace/events/vmscan/enable > > >> cat /debug/trace/trace_pipe > trace.log > > >> > > >> should help > > >> [...] > > > > > > No problem! I enabled writing the trace data to a file and then tried > > > to trigger another OOM situation. That worked, this time without a > > > complete kernel panic, but with only my processes being killed and the > > > system becoming unresponsive. > > > > Under OOM situation, writing to a file on disk unlikely works. Maybe > > logging via network ( "cat /debug/trace/trace_pipe > /dev/udp/$ip/$port" > > if your are using bash) works better. (I wish we can do it from kernel > > so that /bin/cat is not disturbed by delays due to page fault.) > > > > If you can configure netconsole for logging OOM killer messages and > > UDP socket for logging trace_pipe messages, udplogger at > > https://osdn.net/projects/akari/scm/svn/tree/head/branches/udplogger/ > > might fit for logging both output with timestamp into a single file. > > Actually, I decided to give this a try once more on machine #2, i.e. > not the one that produced the previous trace, but the other one. > > I logged via netconsole as well as 'cat /debug/trace/trace_pipe' via > the network to another machine running udplogger. After the machine > had been frehsly booted and I had set up the logging, unpacking of the > firefox source tarball started. After it had been unpacking for a > while, the first load of trace messages started to appear. Some time > later, OOMs started to appear - I've got quite a lot of them in my > capture file this time. Thank you for capturing. I think it worked well. Let's wait for Michal. The first OOM killer invocation was 2016-12-17 21:36:56 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1276.828639] Killed process 3894 (xz) total-vm:68640kB, anon-rss:65920kB, file-rss:1696kB, shmem-rss:0kB and the last OOM killer invocation was 2016-12-17 21:39:27 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1426.800677] Killed process 3070 (screen) total-vm:7440kB, anon-rss:960kB, file-rss:2360kB, shmem-rss:0kB and trace output was sent until 2016-12-17 21:37:07 192.168.17.23:48468 kworker/u4:4-3896 [000] .... 1287.202958: mm_shrink_slab_start: super_cache_scan+0x0/0x170 f4436ed4: nid: 0 objects to shrink 86 gfp_flags GFP_NOFS|__GFP_NOFAIL pgs_scanned 32 lru_pgs 406078 cache items 412 delta 0 total_scan 86 which (I hope) should be sufficient for analysis. > > Unfortunately, the reclaim trace messages stopped a while after the first > OOM messages show up - most likely my "cat" had been killed at that > point or became unresponsive. :-/ > > In the end, the machine didn't completely panic, but after nothing new > showed up being logged via the network, I walked up to the > machine and found it in a state where I couldn't really log in to it > anymore, but all that worked was, as always, a magic SysRequest reboot. There is a known issue (since Linux 2.6.32) that all memory allocation requests get stuck due to kswapd v.s. shrink_inactive_list() livelock which occurs under almost OOM situation ( http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160211225929.GU14668@dastard ). If we hit it, even "page allocation stalls for " messages do not show up. Even if we didn't hit it, although agetty and sshd were still alive 2016-12-17 21:39:27 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1426.800614] [ 2800] 0 2800 1152 494 6 3 0 0 agetty 2016-12-17 21:39:27 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1426.800618] [ 2802] 0 2802 1457 1055 6 3 0 -1000 sshd memory allocation was delaying too much 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034624] btrfs-transacti: page alloction stalls for 93995ms, order:0, mode:0x2400840(GFP_NOFS|__GFP_NOFAIL) 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034628] CPU: 1 PID: 1949 Comm: btrfs-transacti Not tainted 4.9.0-gentoo #3 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034630] Hardware name: Hewlett-Packard Compaq 15 Notebook PC/21F7, BIOS F.22 08/06/2014 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034638] f162f94c c142bd8e 00000001 00000000 f162f970 c110ad7e c1b58833 02400840 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034645] f162f978 f162f980 c1b55814 f162f960 00000160 f162fa38 c110b78c 02400840 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034652] c1b55814 00016f2b 00000000 00400000 00000000 f21d0000 f21d0000 00000001 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034653] Call Trace: 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034660] [<c142bd8e>] dump_stack+0x47/0x69 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034666] [<c110ad7e>] warn_alloc+0xce/0xf0 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034671] [<c110b78c>] __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x97c/0xd30 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034678] [<c1103fbd>] ? find_get_entry+0x1d/0x100 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034681] [<c1102fc1>] ? add_to_page_cache_lru+0x61/0xc0 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034685] [<c110414d>] pagecache_get_page+0xad/0x270 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034692] [<c1366556>] alloc_extent_buffer+0x116/0x3e0 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034699] [<c1334ade>] btrfs_find_create_tree_block+0xe/0x10 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034704] [<c132a62f>] btrfs_alloc_tree_block+0x1ef/0x5f0 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034710] [<c1079050>] ? autoremove_wake_function+0x40/0x40 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034716] [<c130f873>] __btrfs_cow_block+0x143/0x5f0 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034723] [<c130feca>] btrfs_cow_block+0x13a/0x220 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034727] [<c13133a1>] btrfs_search_slot+0x1d1/0x870 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034731] [<c131a74a>] lookup_inline_extent_backref+0x10a/0x6d0 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034736] [<c19b656c>] ? common_interrupt+0x2c/0x34 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034742] [<c131c959>] __btrfs_free_extent+0x129/0xe80 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034750] [<c1322160>] __btrfs_run_delayed_refs+0xaf0/0x13e0 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034754] [<c106f759>] ? set_next_entity+0x659/0xec0 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034757] [<c106c351>] ? put_prev_entity+0x21/0xcf0 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034801] [<fa83b2da>] ? xfs_attr3_leaf_add_work+0x25a/0x420 [xfs] 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034808] [<c13259f1>] btrfs_run_delayed_refs+0x71/0x260 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034813] [<c10903ef>] ? lock_timer_base+0x5f/0x80 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034818] [<c133cefb>] btrfs_commit_transaction+0x2b/0xd30 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034821] [<c133dc65>] ? start_transaction+0x65/0x4b0 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034826] [<c1337f65>] transaction_kthread+0x1b5/0x1d0 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034830] [<c1337db0>] ? btrfs_cleanup_transaction+0x490/0x490 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034833] [<c10552e7>] kthread+0x97/0xb0 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034837] [<c1055250>] ? __kthread_parkme+0x60/0x60 2016-12-17 21:41:03 192.168.17.23:6665 [ 1521.034842] [<c19b5d77>] ret_from_fork+0x1b/0x28 and therefore memory allocation by page fault by trying to login was too slow to wait. > > The complete log, from machine boot right up to the point where it > wouldn't really do anything anymore, is up again on my web server (~42 > MB, 928 KB packed): > > http://ftp.tisys.org/pub/misc/teela_2016-12-17.log.xz > > Greetings > Nils > It might be pointless to check, but is your 4.9.0-gentoo kernel using 4.9.0 final source? The typo "page alloction stalls" was fixed in v4.9-rc5. Maybe some last minute changes are missing...
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
OOM: Better, but still there on 4.9 Nils Holland <nholland@tisys.org> - 2016-12-16 00:10 +0100
Re: OOM: Better, but still there on 4.9 Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-16 08:50 +0100
Re: OOM: Better, but still there on Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-16 17:00 +0100
[PATCH 1/2] mm: consolidate GFP_NOFAIL checks in the allocator slowpath Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-16 17:00 +0100
[PATCH 2/2] mm, oom: do not enfore OOM killer for __GFP_NOFAIL automatically Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-16 17:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm, oom: do not enfore OOM killer for __GFP_NOFAIL automatically Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org> - 2016-12-16 18:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm, oom: do not enfore OOM killer for __GFP_NOFAIL automatically Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-16 23:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm, oom: do not enfore OOM killer for __GFP_NOFAIL automatically Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2016-12-17 12:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm, oom: do not enfore OOM killer for __GFP_NOFAIL automatically Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-18 17:40 +0100
Re: OOM: Better, but still there on Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-17 01:10 +0100
Re: OOM: Better, but still there on Nils Holland <nholland@tisys.org> - 2016-12-17 14:10 +0100
Re: OOM: Better, but still there on Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2016-12-17 15:50 +0100
Re: OOM: Better, but still there on Nils Holland <nholland@tisys.org> - 2016-12-17 18:20 +0100
Re: OOM: Better, but still there on Nils Holland <nholland@tisys.org> - 2016-12-17 22:10 +0100
Re: OOM: Better, but still there on Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2016-12-18 06:20 +0100
Re: OOM: Better, but still there on Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-19 14:50 +0100
Re: OOM: Better, but still there on Nils Holland <nholland@tisys.org> - 2016-12-20 03:10 +0100
Re: OOM: Better, but still there on Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-21 08:40 +0100
Re: OOM: Better, but still there on Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2016-12-21 12:10 +0100
Re: OOM: Better, but still there on Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-21 12:20 +0100
Re: OOM: Better, but still there on Nils Holland <nholland@tisys.org> - 2016-12-22 11:20 +0100
Re: OOM: Better, but still there on Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-22 11:30 +0100
Re: OOM: Better, but still there on Nils Holland <nholland@tisys.org> - 2016-12-22 11:40 +0100
Re: OOM: Better, but still there on Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> - 2016-12-22 11:50 +0100
Re: OOM: Better, but still there on Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-22 20:20 +0100
Re: OOM: Better, but still there on Nils Holland <nholland@tisys.org> - 2016-12-22 22:50 +0100
Re: OOM: Better, but still there on Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-23 12:00 +0100
Re: OOM: Better, but still there on Nils Holland <nholland@tisys.org> - 2016-12-23 13:20 +0100
Re: OOM: Better, but still there on Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-23 14:00 +0100
[RFC PATCH] mm, memcg: fix (Re: OOM: Better, but still there on) Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-23 15:50 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, memcg: fix (Re: OOM: Better, but still there on) Nils Holland <nholland@tisys.org> - 2016-12-23 23:30 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, memcg: fix (Re: OOM: Better, but still there on) Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-26 13:50 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, memcg: fix (Re: OOM: Better, but still there on) Nils Holland <nholland@tisys.org> - 2016-12-26 20:00 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, memcg: fix (Re: OOM: Better, but still there on) Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-27 09:10 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, memcg: fix (Re: OOM: Better, but still there on) Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-27 12:30 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, memcg: fix (Re: OOM: Better, but still there on) Nils Holland <nholland@tisys.org> - 2016-12-27 12:30 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, memcg: fix (Re: OOM: Better, but still there on) Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-27 17:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH] mm, vmscan: consider eligible zones in get_scan_count kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com> - 2016-12-27 17:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH] mm, vmscan: consider eligible zones in get_scan_count Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-28 10:00 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, memcg: fix (Re: OOM: Better, but still there on) Nils Holland <nholland@tisys.org> - 2016-12-27 20:40 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, memcg: fix (Re: OOM: Better, but still there on) Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-28 10:00 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, memcg: fix (Re: OOM: Better, but still there on) Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2016-12-29 02:30 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, memcg: fix (Re: OOM: Better, but still there on) Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-29 10:10 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, memcg: fix (Re: OOM: Better, but still there on) Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2016-12-30 03:10 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, memcg: fix (Re: OOM: Better, but still there on) Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-30 11:50 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, memcg: fix (Re: OOM: Better, but still there on) Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2016-12-29 01:40 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, memcg: fix (Re: OOM: Better, but still there on) Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> - 2016-12-29 02:10 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, memcg: fix (Re: OOM: Better, but still there on) Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-29 10:00 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, memcg: fix (Re: OOM: Better, but still there on) Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de> - 2016-12-30 11:20 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, memcg: fix (Re: OOM: Better, but still there on) Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-30 12:10 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] mm, memcg: fix (Re: OOM: Better, but still there on) Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de> - 2016-12-30 13:50 +0100
Re: [lkp-developer] [mm, memcg] d18e2b2aca: WARNING:at_mm/memcontrol.c:#mem_cgroup_update_lru_size Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-26 13:30 +0100
Re: [lkp-developer] [mm, memcg] d18e2b2aca: WARNING:at_mm/memcontrol.c:#mem_cgroup_update_lru_size Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-26 14:00 +0100
Re: OOM: Better, but still there on "Xin Zhou" <xin.zhou@gmx.com> - 2016-12-18 01:40 +0100
Re: OOM: Better, but still there on 4.9 Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-16 23:20 +0100
Re: OOM: Better, but still there on 4.9 Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2016-12-17 00:40 +0100
csiph-web