[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

__alloc_pages: errors resolved? [wa Re: __alloc_pages: 2-order allocation failed]

I've abandoned the Debian 2.4 kernels in favor of vanilla 2.4.30, and
this problem has yet to crop up.

 11:03:06 up 9 days, 18:42, 13 users,  load average: 0.47, 0.17, 0.14

Working on 10 days uptime, and no complaints.  The SMTP server has yet
to stop responding, too.

David?  I know you thought this problem was with SA (and I agree that
there may be an issue with how SA does things), but as I thought, there
seems to be a larger problem with the kernel, unless memory allocation
errors are commonplace (strangely, this is the ONLY box I've ever seen
this occur on).  Care to acknowledge this?

Judging from Ansgar's post, 2.4.30 doesn't necessarily fix things
(though it seems to be working in my case - there does seem to have
been a few modifications to kmem_cache_grow and related functions
between Debian's 2.4.27 and vanilla 2.4.30).  Instead of ignoring the
issue, can you please look into it?

Thank you.

On Fri, May 20, 2005 at 08:40:03PM +0200, Ansgar Esztermann said:
> On Fri, May 20, 2005 at 11:20:49AM -0400, Mike Edwards wrote:
> > Is it all related to spamc's failure to check errors on sockets?  spamc
> > does seem to appear in (nearly?) every case - but if all of this is
> > happening just because spamc doesn't check for errors correctly, I'd
> > have to say that this is a major bug somewhere, as one errant process
> > shouldn't be causing problems like this.
> I see the same errors, though I do not have spamc installed. For me,
> it's mtx. The box is an E450 with slightly less than 500M and a 2.4.30
> kernel.
> A.
> -- 
> Ansgar Esztermann
> Researcher & Sysadmin
> http://www2.thphy.uni-duesseldorf.de/~ansgar

Mike Edwards <sauron-debian-sparc@psychology.rutgers.edu>
System Administrator
Psychology Department, Rutgers University, Newark campus

Reply to: