On 27/08/13 17:30, Dave Jones wrote:
Seems to do the trick.
We are running many virtualization hosts with Linux 3.11.3, qemu 1.6.1 +
kvm and ksm. The hosts have 128GB RAM, 10GB swap and 24x AMD Opteron
6238 cores.
Several times few weeks ago, we have seen the OOM killer come to life
and
On 27/08/13 17:30, Dave Jones wrote:
Seems to do the trick.
We are running many virtualization hosts with Linux 3.11.3, qemu 1.6.1 +
kvm and ksm. The hosts have 128GB RAM, 10GB swap and 24x AMD Opteron
6238 cores.
Several times few weeks ago, we have seen the OOM killer come to life
and
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 12:24:27PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> >
> > I managed to trigger the issue as well. The patch below fixes it.
> > Dave, could you please give it a shot once time permit?
>
> Seems to do the trick.
>
> Tested-by: Dave Jones
Thanks a lot, Dave!
--
To unsubscribe from
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 12:37:18PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 06:28:33PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > >
> > > I've not tried matching up bits with Dave's reports, and just going
> > > into a meeting now, but this patch looks worth a try: probably Cyrill
> > >
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 06:28:33PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> >
> > I've not tried matching up bits with Dave's reports, and just going
> > into a meeting now, but this patch looks worth a try: probably Cyrill
> > can improve it meanwhile to what he actually wants there (I'm
> > surprised
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 06:28:33PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
I've not tried matching up bits with Dave's reports, and just going
into a meeting now, but this patch looks worth a try: probably Cyrill
can improve it meanwhile to what he actually wants there (I'm
surprised anything
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 12:37:18PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 06:28:33PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
I've not tried matching up bits with Dave's reports, and just going
into a meeting now, but this patch looks worth a try: probably Cyrill
can improve
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 12:24:27PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
I managed to trigger the issue as well. The patch below fixes it.
Dave, could you please give it a shot once time permit?
Seems to do the trick.
Tested-by: Dave Jones da...@fedoraproject.org
Thanks a lot, Dave!
--
To
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 04:15:00PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> >
> > I just did a quick diff of 3.11-rc7/mm against 3.10, and here's
> > a line in mremap which worries me. That set_pte_at() is operating
> > on anything that isn't
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
>
> I just did a quick diff of 3.11-rc7/mm against 3.10, and here's
> a line in mremap which worries me. That set_pte_at() is operating
> on anything that isn't pte_none(), so the pte_mksoft_dirty() looks
> prone to corrupt a swap entry.
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 03:08:45PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > That said, google does find "swap_free: Unused swap offset entry"
> > reports from over the years. Most of them seem to be single-bit
> > errors, though (ie when the entry is 0100 or similar I'm more
> > inclined to blame
On Mon, 26 Aug 2013, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Linus Torvalds
> wrote:
> >
> > So I'm almost likely to think that we are more likely to have
> > something wrong in the messy magical special cases.
>
> Of course, the good news would be if it actually ends up being
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 01:49:40AM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 05:42:44PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, for reproducing this bug, I'd stick to running it as a user, without
> > --dangerous.
> > you might still hit a few fairly-easy to trigger
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 05:42:44PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
>
> Yeah, for reproducing this bug, I'd stick to running it as a user, without
> --dangerous.
> you might still hit a few fairly-easy to trigger warn-on/printks. I run with
> this applied:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 01:37:54AM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 12:42:03AM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 04:37:02PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > >
> > > Try adding the -C64 to the invocation in scripts/test-multi.sh,
> > > and perhaps
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 12:42:03AM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 04:37:02PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> >
> > Try adding the -C64 to the invocation in scripts/test-multi.sh,
> > and perhaps up'ing the NR_PROCESSES variable there too.
>
> Thanks! I'll ping you if I manage
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
> So I'm almost likely to think that we are more likely to have
> something wrong in the messy magical special cases.
Of course, the good news would be if it actually ends up being the
soft-dirty stuff, and bisection hits something recent.
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 04:37:02PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
>
> Try adding the -C64 to the invocation in scripts/test-multi.sh,
> and perhaps up'ing the NR_PROCESSES variable there too.
Thanks! I'll ping you if I manage to crash my instance.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 12:18:46AM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 03:08:22PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 11:45:53AM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
> > > >
> > > > It actually seems
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 03:08:22PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 11:45:53AM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
> > >
> > > It actually seems worse, seems I can trigger it even easier now, as if
> > > there's a leak.
> > >
>
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Dave Jones wrote:
>
> [ 4588.541886] swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 2d15
> [ 4588.541952] BUG: Bad page map in process trinity-kid12 pte:005a2a80
> pmd:22c01f067
>
> I can reproduce this pretty quickly by driving the system into swapping using
> a few
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 11:45:53AM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
> >
> > It actually seems worse, seems I can trigger it even easier now, as if
> > there's a leak.
> >
> Can you please try the new fix for TLB flush?
>
> commit
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 11:45:53AM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Dave Jones da...@redhat.com wrote:
It actually seems worse, seems I can trigger it even easier now, as if
there's a leak.
Can you please try the new fix for TLB flush?
commit
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Dave Jones da...@redhat.com wrote:
[ 4588.541886] swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 2d15
[ 4588.541952] BUG: Bad page map in process trinity-kid12 pte:005a2a80
pmd:22c01f067
I can reproduce this pretty quickly by driving the system into swapping
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 03:08:22PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 11:45:53AM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Dave Jones da...@redhat.com wrote:
It actually seems worse, seems I can trigger it even easier now, as if
there's a leak.
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 12:18:46AM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 03:08:22PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 11:45:53AM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Dave Jones da...@redhat.com wrote:
It actually seems
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 04:37:02PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
Try adding the -C64 to the invocation in scripts/test-multi.sh,
and perhaps up'ing the NR_PROCESSES variable there too.
Thanks! I'll ping you if I manage to crash my instance.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Linus Torvalds
torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote:
So I'm almost likely to think that we are more likely to have
something wrong in the messy magical special cases.
Of course, the good news would be if it actually ends up being the
soft-dirty stuff, and
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 12:42:03AM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 04:37:02PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
Try adding the -C64 to the invocation in scripts/test-multi.sh,
and perhaps up'ing the NR_PROCESSES variable there too.
Thanks! I'll ping you if I manage to crash
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 01:37:54AM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 12:42:03AM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 04:37:02PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
Try adding the -C64 to the invocation in scripts/test-multi.sh,
and perhaps up'ing the
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 05:42:44PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
Yeah, for reproducing this bug, I'd stick to running it as a user, without
--dangerous.
you might still hit a few fairly-easy to trigger warn-on/printks. I run with
this applied: http://paste.fedoraproject.org/34960/55323613/raw/
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 01:49:40AM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 05:42:44PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
Yeah, for reproducing this bug, I'd stick to running it as a user, without
--dangerous.
you might still hit a few fairly-easy to trigger warn-on/printks. I
On Mon, 26 Aug 2013, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Linus Torvalds
torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote:
So I'm almost likely to think that we are more likely to have
something wrong in the messy magical special cases.
Of course, the good news would be if it
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 03:08:45PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
That said, google does find swap_free: Unused swap offset entry
reports from over the years. Most of them seem to be single-bit
errors, though (ie when the entry is 0100 or similar I'm more
inclined to blame a bit
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Hugh Dickins hu...@google.com wrote:
I just did a quick diff of 3.11-rc7/mm against 3.10, and here's
a line in mremap which worries me. That set_pte_at() is operating
on anything that isn't pte_none(), so the pte_mksoft_dirty() looks
prone to corrupt a swap
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 04:15:00PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Hugh Dickins hu...@google.com wrote:
I just did a quick diff of 3.11-rc7/mm against 3.10, and here's
a line in mremap which worries me. That set_pte_at() is operating
on anything that isn't
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
>
> It actually seems worse, seems I can trigger it even easier now, as if
> there's a leak.
>
Can you please try the new fix for TLB flush?
commit 2b047252d087be7f2ba
Fix TLB gather virtual address range invalidation corner cases
--
To
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Dave Jones da...@redhat.com wrote:
It actually seems worse, seems I can trigger it even easier now, as if
there's a leak.
Can you please try the new fix for TLB flush?
commit 2b047252d087be7f2ba
Fix TLB gather virtual address range invalidation corner cases
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 11:27:29AM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
> >
> > I still see the swap_free messages with this applied.
> >
> Decremented?
It actually seems worse, seems I can trigger it even easier now, as if
there's a leak.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:21:28AM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:49 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
> >
> > didn't hit the bug_on, but got a bunch of
> >
> > [ 424.077993] swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 000187d5
> > [ 439.377194] swap_free: Unused swap offset entry
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:21:28AM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:49 AM, Dave Jones da...@redhat.com wrote:
didn't hit the bug_on, but got a bunch of
[ 424.077993] swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 000187d5
[ 439.377194] swap_free: Unused swap offset
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 11:27:29AM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Dave Jones da...@redhat.com wrote:
I still see the swap_free messages with this applied.
Decremented?
It actually seems worse, seems I can trigger it even easier now, as if
there's a leak.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:49 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
>
> didn't hit the bug_on, but got a bunch of
>
> [ 424.077993] swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 000187d5
> [ 439.377194] swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 000187e7
> [ 441.998411] swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 000187ee
> [
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:49 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
>
> didn't hit the bug_on, but got a bunch of
>
> [ 424.077993] swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 000187d5
> [ 439.377194] swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 000187e7
> [ 441.998411] swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 000187ee
> [
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 12:39:05PM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 7:18 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
>
> --- a/mm/memory.c Wed Aug 7 16:29:34 2013
> +++ b/mm/memory.c Tue Aug 20 11:13:06 2013
> @@ -933,8 +933,10 @@ again:
> if (progress >= 32) {
> progress = 0;
> if
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 12:39:05PM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 7:18 AM, Dave Jones da...@redhat.com wrote:
--- a/mm/memory.c Wed Aug 7 16:29:34 2013
+++ b/mm/memory.c Tue Aug 20 11:13:06 2013
@@ -933,8 +933,10 @@ again:
if (progress = 32) {
progress = 0;
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:49 AM, Dave Jones da...@redhat.com wrote:
didn't hit the bug_on, but got a bunch of
[ 424.077993] swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 000187d5
[ 439.377194] swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 000187e7
[ 441.998411] swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 000187ee
[
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:49 AM, Dave Jones da...@redhat.com wrote:
didn't hit the bug_on, but got a bunch of
[ 424.077993] swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 000187d5
[ 439.377194] swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 000187e7
[ 441.998411] swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 000187ee
[
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 7:18 AM, Dave Jones wrote:
>
> btw, anyone have thoughts on a patch something like below ?
And another(sorry if message is reformatted by the mail agent,
and it took my an hour to get the agent back to the correct format but failed,
and thanks a lot for any howto send
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 11:20:28PM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Dave Jones wrote:
> > printk didn't trigger.
> >
> Is a corrupted page table entry encountered, according to the
> comment of swap_duplicate()?
>
>
> --- a/mm/swapfile.c Wed Aug 7 17:27:22
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 11:20:28PM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Dave Jones da...@redhat.com wrote:
printk didn't trigger.
Is a corrupted page table entry encountered, according to the
comment of swap_duplicate()?
--- a/mm/swapfile.c Wed Aug 7
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 7:18 AM, Dave Jones da...@redhat.com wrote:
btw, anyone have thoughts on a patch something like below ?
And another(sorry if message is reformatted by the mail agent,
and it took my an hour to get the agent back to the correct format but failed,
and thanks a lot for any
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 11:20:28PM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Dave Jones wrote:
> > printk didn't trigger.
> >
> Is a corrupted page table entry encountered, according to the
> comment of swap_duplicate()?
>
>
> --- a/mm/swapfile.c Wed Aug 7 17:27:22
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Dave Jones wrote:
> printk didn't trigger.
>
Is a corrupted page table entry encountered, according to the
comment of swap_duplicate()?
--- a/mm/swapfile.c Wed Aug 7 17:27:22 2013
+++ b/mm/swapfile.c Thu Aug 8 23:12:30 2013
@@ -770,6 +770,7 @@ int
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Dave Jones da...@redhat.com wrote:
printk didn't trigger.
Is a corrupted page table entry encountered, according to the
comment of swap_duplicate()?
--- a/mm/swapfile.c Wed Aug 7 17:27:22 2013
+++ b/mm/swapfile.c Thu Aug 8 23:12:30 2013
@@ -770,6
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 11:20:28PM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Dave Jones da...@redhat.com wrote:
printk didn't trigger.
Is a corrupted page table entry encountered, according to the
comment of swap_duplicate()?
--- a/mm/swapfile.c Wed Aug 7
void __lru_cache_add(struct page *page)
{
struct pagevec *pvec = _cpu_var(lru_add_pvec);
page_cache_get(page);
if (!pagevec_space(pvec))
__pagevec_lru_add(pvec);
pagevec_add(pvec, page);
put_cpu_var(lru_add_pvec);
}
I added a printk, and
On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 06:04:20PM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
> > There were a slew of these. same trace, different addr/anon_vma/index.
> > mapping always null.
> >
> Would you please run again with the debug info added?
> ---
> --- a/mm/swapfile.c Wed Aug 7 17:27:22 2013
> +++
Hello Dave
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Dave Jones wrote:
> Seen while fuzzing with lots of child processes.
>
> swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 001263f5
> BUG: Bad page map in process trinity-child29 pte:24c7ea00 pmd:09fec067
> addr:7f9db958d000 vm_flags:00100073
Hello Dave
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Dave Jones da...@redhat.com wrote:
Seen while fuzzing with lots of child processes.
swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 001263f5
BUG: Bad page map in process trinity-child29 pte:24c7ea00 pmd:09fec067
addr:7f9db958d000 vm_flags:00100073
On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 06:04:20PM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
There were a slew of these. same trace, different addr/anon_vma/index.
mapping always null.
Would you please run again with the debug info added?
---
--- a/mm/swapfile.c Wed Aug 7 17:27:22 2013
+++ b/mm/swapfile.c
void __lru_cache_add(struct page *page)
{
struct pagevec *pvec = get_cpu_var(lru_add_pvec);
page_cache_get(page);
if (!pagevec_space(pvec))
__pagevec_lru_add(pvec);
pagevec_add(pvec, page);
put_cpu_var(lru_add_pvec);
}
I added a printk,
Seen while fuzzing with lots of child processes.
swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 001263f5
BUG: Bad page map in process trinity-child29 pte:24c7ea00 pmd:09fec067
addr:7f9db958d000 vm_flags:00100073 anon_vma:88022c004ba0 mapping:
(null) index:f99
Modules linked in: fuse
Seen while fuzzing with lots of child processes.
swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 001263f5
BUG: Bad page map in process trinity-child29 pte:24c7ea00 pmd:09fec067
addr:7f9db958d000 vm_flags:00100073 anon_vma:88022c004ba0 mapping:
(null) index:f99
Modules linked in: fuse
64 matches
Mail list logo
