From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 23 15:46:20 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 934CC37B401 for ; Fri, 23 May 2003 15:46:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ztxmail03.ztx.compaq.com (ztxmail03.ztx.compaq.com [161.114.1.207]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B43C043F3F for ; Fri, 23 May 2003 15:46:19 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from john.cagle@hp.com) Received: from cceexg12.americas.cpqcorp.net (cceexg12.americas.cpqcorp.net [16.110.250.124]) by ztxmail03.ztx.compaq.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87B96BE8F; Fri, 23 May 2003 17:43:49 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cceexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net ([16.110.250.85]) by cceexg12.americas.cpqcorp.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6673); Fri, 23 May 2003 17:40:19 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6375.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 17:40:19 -0500 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: 5.1 PAE testing results: 2 panics Thread-Index: AcMg1Iqg6iNuw7uDSqKhexD1ykLWeQAYv3+AABEAFfA= From: "Cagle, John (ISS-Houston)" To: "Jake Burkholder" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 May 2003 22:40:19.0755 (UTC) FILETIME=[49FDFFB0:01C3217C] cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: RE: 5.1 PAE testing results: 2 panics X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 22:46:20 -0000 Interesting new datapoint on my PAE testing -- I built a kernel without SMP and APIC (just the stock PAE config file) and now I _cannot_ crash it. Of course, it's only using one processor... :-( Is it possible that the memory allocation algorithms aren't taking into consideration that there may be multiple processors with SMP enabled? Are there any large per-processor data structures that aren't being accounted for when you have more than one processor? Regards, John > -----Original Message----- > From: Cagle, John (ISS-Houston)=20 > Sent: Friday, May 23, 2003 10:03 AM > To: Jake Burkholder > Cc: current@freebsd.org > Subject: RE: 5.1 PAE testing results: 2 panics >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jake Burkholder [mailto:jake@locore.ca] > > > panic: kmem_malloc(4096): kmem_map too small: 96624640 total > > > allocated > > >=20 > > > I tried lowering kern.maxvnodes from 536130 (default) to > > 200000, but > > > that did not alleviate the panic. > >=20 > > Can you try reducing this by half again to 100,000 and see if > > that helps things? Increasing the amount of available kva=20 > > with options KVA_PAGES may also work, but finding the right=20 > > limits for vnodes is a better solution. Note that the values=20 > > for KVA_PAGES are doubled with PAE, eg 512 gives you the=20 > > standard 3G user/1G kernel split. >=20 > I have gone as low as 10,000 for kern.maxvnodes, and it still=20 > Panics with "kmem_map too small". How low should I go? >=20 > I also built a kernel with KVA_PAGES set to 512 and it=20 > paniced the same way (without changing kern.maxvnodes). When=20 > I also changed maxvnodes to 100,000, then the system hung=20 > instead of panicing... >=20 > Anything else I can try? Keep in mind I'm running SMP. =20 > Should I try it with a UP kernel? >=20 > Thanks, > John > -------------------------------- > John Cagle john.cagle@hp.com > Principal Member Technical Staff > Industry Standard Servers > Hewlett-Packard Company=20