Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 22:01:03 +0200 From: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> To: Andreas Tobler <andreast-list@fgznet.ch> Cc: FreeBSD Arch <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: powerpc64 malloc limit? Message-ID: <20111130200103.GE50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> In-Reply-To: <4ED66B75.3060409@fgznet.ch> References: <4ED5BE19.70805@fgznet.ch> <20111130162236.GA50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <4ED65F70.7050700@fgznet.ch> <20111130170936.GB50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <4ED66B75.3060409@fgznet.ch>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--BJNipRl4fWPaRlLb
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 06:44:21PM +0100, Andreas Tobler wrote:
> On 30.11.11 18:09, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> >On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 05:53:04PM +0100, Andreas Tobler wrote:
> >>On 30.11.11 17:22, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> >>>On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 06:24:41AM +0100, Andreas Tobler wrote:
> >>>>All,
> >>>>
> >>>>while working on gcc I found a very strange situation which renders my
> >>>>powerpc64 machine unusable.
> >>>>The test case below tries to allocate that much memory as 'wanted'. T=
he
> >>>>same test case on amd64 returns w/o trying to allocate mem because the
> >>>>size is far to big.
> >>>>
> >>>>I couldn't find the reason so far, that's why I'm here.
> >>>>
> >>>>As Nathan pointed out the VM_MAXUSER_SIZE is the biggest on powerpc64:
> >>>>#define VM_MAXUSER_ADDRESS (0x7ffffffffffff000UL)
> >>>>
> >>>>So, I'd expect a system to return an allocation error when a user tri=
es
> >>>>to allocate too much memory and not really trying it and going to be
> >>>>unusable. Iow, I'd exepect the situation on powerpc64 as I see on amd=
64.
> >>>>
> >>>>Can anybody explain me the situation, why do I not have a working lim=
it
> >>>>on powerpc64?
> >>>>
> >>>>The machine itself has 7GB RAM and 12GB swap. The amd64 where I compa=
red
> >>>>has around 4GB/4GB RAM/swap.
> >>>>
> >>>>TIA,
> >>>>Andreas
> >>>>
> >>>>include<stdlib.h>
> >>>>#include<stdio.h>
> >>>>
> >>>>int main()
> >>>>{
> >>>> void *p;
> >>>>
> >>>> p =3D (void*) malloc (1152921504606846968ULL);
> >>>> if (p !=3D NULL)
> >>>> printf("p =3D %p\n", p);
> >>>>
> >>>> printf("p =3D %p\n", p);
> >>>> return (0);
> >>>>}
> >>>
> >>>First, you should provide details of what consistutes 'the unusable
> >>>machine situation' on powerpc.
> >>
> >>I can not login anymore, everything is stuck except the core control
> >>mechanisms for example the fan controller.
> >>
> >>Top reports 'ugly' figures, below from a earlier try:
> >>
> >>last pid: 6790; load averages: 0.78, 0.84, 0.86 up 0+00:34:52
> >>22:42:29 47 processes: 1 running, 46 sleeping
> >>CPU: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 15.4% system, 11.8% interrupt, 72.8% idle
> >>Mem: 5912M Active, 570M Inact, 280M Wired, 26M Cache, 104M Buf, 352K Fr=
ee
> >>Swap: 12G Total, 9904M Used, 2383M Free, 80% Inuse, 178M Out
> >>
> >> PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE C TIME WCPU
> >>COMMAND
> >> 6768 andreast 1 52 01073741824G 6479M pfault 1 0:58
> >>18.90% 31370.
> >>
> >>And after my mem and swap are full I see swap_pager_getswapspace(16)=20
> >>failed.
> >>
> >>In this state I can only power-cycle the machine.
> >>
> >>>That said, on amd64 the user map is between 0 and 0x7fffffffffff, which
> >>>obviously less then the requested allocation size 0x100000000000000.
> >>>If you look at the kdump output on amd64, you will see that malloc()
> >>>tries to mmap() the area, fails and retries with obreak(). Default
> >>>virtual memory limit is unlimited, so my best quess is that on amd64
> >>>vm_map_findspace() returns immediately.
> >>>
> >>>On powerpc64, I see no reason why vm_map_entry cannot be allocated, but
> >>>please note that vm object and pages shall be only allocated on demand.
> >>>So I am curious how does your machine breaks and where.
> >>
> >>I would expect that the 'system' does not allow me to allocate that much
> >>of ram.
> >
> >Does the issue with machine going into limbo reproducable with the code
> >you posted ?
>=20
> If I understand you correctly, yes. I can launch the test case and the=20
> machine is immediately unusable. Means I can not kill the process nor=20
> can I log in. Also, top does not show anything useful.
Again, let me restate my question: the single mmap() of the huge size is
enough for powerpc64 machine to break apart ?
What happen if you insert sleep(1000000); call before return ? Do not kill
the process, I want to know is machine dead while the process sleeps.
>=20
> The original test case where I discovered this behavior behaves a bit=20
> different.
> http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/trunk/libstdc%2B%2B-v3/testsuite/23_containers=
/vector/bool/modifiers/insert/31370.cc?revision=3D169421&view=3Dmarkup
>=20
> Here I can follow how the ram and swap is eaten up. Top is reporting the=
=20
> figures. If everything is 'full', the swaper errors start to appear on=20
> the console.
>=20
> >Or, do you need to actually touch the pages in the allocated region ?
>=20
> If I have to, how would I do that?
You read or write into each page in the region.
>=20
> >If the later (and I do expect that), then how many pages do you need
> >to touch before machine breaks ? Is it single access that causes the
> >havoc, or you need to touch the amount approximately equal to RAM+swap ?
>=20
> Andreas
--BJNipRl4fWPaRlLb
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (FreeBSD)
iEYEARECAAYFAk7Wi38ACgkQC3+MBN1Mb4g7lQCcDFAgpunUqroZKNwgwUPuHIEn
+EMAniqJfv8Uhm2rq3WrqjOJ/aXUsM3J
=J9ox
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--BJNipRl4fWPaRlLb--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20111130200103.GE50300>