On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 05:33:27PM +0200, Lars Ellenberg wrote: > On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 10:31:54AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > > Greetings, > > > > My "kvm -m 256" reliably goes Out Of Memory after this commit. It may > > not be the only one that eats up the memory, however I wonder how much > > memory consumption this commit added? Thanks! > > > > Out of curiosity, what exactly is it you are doing there? > What project or appliance or behaviour or product or paper is the goal?
Philipp, this is the 0day kernel testing project from Intel OTC. We are running regular build/boot tests for 300+ kernel git trees and aim to find and report problems ASAP. We test 30000+ kernel boots every day (mainly in KVM). > We scale certain mempools and reserves with > DRBD_MAX_BIO_SIZE/PAGE_SIZE * minor_count. > > DRBD_MAX_BIO_SIZE has been increased by this patch, > resulting in more memory allocated to those reserved pools. > > Please just scale down the "minor_count" parameter. > You can use the module parameter (e.g. modprobe drbd minor_count=8), > or, compiled in, use the kernel command line parameter drbd.minor_count=8. > > Though "minor_count" at some point used to be the hard limit for the number of > minor devices (allocation of an array of corresponding size), that has > long since changed, and now it is really only used as scaling factor for > these mempools. Got it, thank you very much for the helpful tips and explanations! I'll add the drbd.minor_count=8 option. Thanks, Fengguang -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
