Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 22 Sep 2007 23:37:37 +0200
From:      Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Darren Reed <darrenr@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org>
Subject:   Re: panic: kmem_malloc(131072): kmem_map too small (AMD64)
Message-ID:  <46F58B21.8030307@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <46F58799.1030702@freebsd.org>
References:  <20070921102946.T11189@borg>	<46F415BF.9010500@FreeBSD.org>	<20070921140550.D96923@thebighonker.lerctr.org>	<46F41CFF.6080108@FreeBSD.org> <46F58799.1030702@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Darren Reed wrote:
> Kris Kennaway wrote:
>> Larry Rosenman wrote:
>>> On Fri, 21 Sep 2007, Kris Kennaway wrote:
>>>
>>>> Larry Rosenman wrote:
>>>>> I'm a heavy ZFS user, and got the following panic on 2007-09-18 
>>>>> source/world:
>>>>
>>>> This is a FAQ, please see the archives (you need to increase the 
>>>> vm.kmem_size to provide more memory to ZFS).
>>>
>>> I thought that was only for i386, and it hadn't been an issue before.
>>
>> Nope.  It is also load-dependent.
> 
> So I just received this courtesy of ZFS:
> panic: kmem_malloc(131072): kmem_map too small: 343027712 total allocated
> cpuid = 0
> KDB: enter: panic
> 
> This was with these settings in loader.conf:
> vm.kmem_size=419430400
> vm.kmem_size_max=419430400
> vfs.zfs.arc_max=409715200
> 
> (That's 400M, 400M and 40M, respectively.)
> 
> Stupid question, perhaps, but is vm.kmem_size/vm.kmem_size_max limited 
> by physical RAM?

Yes.

Kris




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?46F58B21.8030307>