On Thu 2020-05-28 14:07:50, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Thu 28-05-20 14:03:54, Pavel Machek wrote: > > On Thu 2020-05-28 11:05:17, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > On Tue 26-05-20 11:10:54, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > [...] > > > > [38617.276517] oom_reaper: reaped process 31769 (chromium), now > > > > anon-rss:0kB, file-rss:0kB, shmem-rss:7968kB > > > > [38617.277232] Xorg invoked oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x0(), order=0, > > > > oom_score_adj=0 > > > > [38617.277247] CPU: 0 PID: 2978 Comm: Xorg Not tainted > > > > 5.7.0-rc5-next-20200515+ #117 > > > > [38617.277256] Hardware name: LENOVO 17097HU/17097HU, BIOS 7BETD8WW > > > > (2.19 ) 03/31/2011 > > > > [38617.277266] Call Trace: > > > > [38617.277286] dump_stack+0x54/0x6e > > > > [38617.277300] dump_header+0x45/0x321 > > > > [38617.277313] oom_kill_process.cold+0x9/0xe > > > > [38617.277324] ? out_of_memory+0x167/0x420 > > > > [38617.277336] out_of_memory+0x1f2/0x420 > > > > [38617.277348] pagefault_out_of_memory+0x34/0x56 > > > > [38617.277361] mm_fault_error+0x4a/0x130 > > > > [38617.277372] do_page_fault+0x3ce/0x416 > > > > > > The reason the OOM killer has been invoked is that the page fault > > > handler has returned VM_FAULT_OOM. So this is not a result of the page > > > allocator struggling to allocate a memory. It would be interesting to > > > check which code path has returned this. > > > > Should the core WARN_ON if that happens and there's enough memory, or > > something like that? > > I wish it would simply go away. There shouldn't be really any reason for > VM_FAULT_OOM to exist. The real low on memory situation is already > handled in the page allocator.
Umm. Maybe the WARN_ON is first step in that direction? So we can see
what driver actually did that, and complain to its authors?
Best regards,
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures)
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
