On Monday 11 April 2005 13:45, Nick Piggin wrote: > > No luck yet (on SMP i386). How many disks are you using in each > raid1 array? You are using one array for swap, and one mounted as > ext3 for the working area of the `stress` program, right? >
Right. I'm using two Seagate ATA133 disks (ide controler is AMD-8111) each with 4 partitions, so I get 4 md Raid1 devices. The first one, md0, is for swap. The rest are ~$ df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/md1 4.6G 1.9G 2.6G 42% / tmpfs 1005M 0 1005M 0% /dev/shm /dev/md3 32G 107M 30G 1% /home /dev/md2 31G 149M 29G 1% /var In these tests, /home on md3 is the working area for stress. The io scheduler used is the anticipatory. > Neil, have you had a look at the traces? Do they mean much to you? > > Claudio - I have attached another patch you could try. It has a more > complete set of mempool and related memory allocation fixes, as well > as some other recent patches I had which reduces atomic memory usage > by the block layer. Could you try if you get time? Thanks. OK, I'll try them in a few minutes and report back. I'm curious as whether increasing the vm.min_free_kbytes sysctl value would help or not in this case. But I guess it wouldn't since there is already some free memory and also the alloc failures are order 0, right? Thanks Claudio - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
