Re: kswapd0: page allocation failure: order:0, mode:0x820(GFP_ATOMIC), nodemask=(null),cpuset=/,mems_allowed=0 (Kernel v6.5.9, 32bit ppc)

On 2024/6/6 13:43, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > On (24/06/06 12:46), Chengming Zhou wrote: >>>> Agree, I think we should try to improve locking scalability of zsmalloc. >>>> I have some thoughts to share, no code or test data yet: >>>> >>>> 1. Fir

Re: kswapd0: page allocation failure: order:0, mode:0x820(GFP_ATOMIC), nodemask=(null),cpuset=/,mems_allowed=0 (Kernel v6.5.9, 32bit ppc)

On 2024/6/6 12:31, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > On (24/06/06 10:49), Chengming Zhou wrote: >>> Thanks for trying this out. This is interesting, so even two zpools is >>> too much fragmentation for your use case. >>> >>> I think there are multiple ways to go f

Re: kswapd0: page allocation failure: order:0, mode:0x820(GFP_ATOMIC), nodemask=(null),cpuset=/,mems_allowed=0 (Kernel v6.5.9, 32bit ppc)

On 2024/6/6 07:41, Yosry Ahmed wrote: > On Wed, Jun 5, 2024 at 4:04 PM Erhard Furtner wrote: >> >> On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 20:03:27 -0700 >> Yosry Ahmed wrote: >> >>> Could you check if the attached patch helps? It basically changes the >>> number of zpools from 32 to min(32, nr_cpus). >> >> Thanks! T

Re: [powerpc] Lockups seen during/just after boot (bisected)

On 2023/11/23 19:27, Sachin Sant wrote: > While booting recent -next kernel on IBM Power server, I have observed lockups > either during boot or just after. > > [ 3631.015775] watchdog: CPU 3 self-detected hard LOCKUP @ > __update_freelist_slow+0x74/0x90 Sorry, the bug can be fixed by this patch