Bug 560650
Summary: | OOM due to probable memory leak in "megaraid_sas" driver | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 | Reporter: | Konstantin Khorenko <khorenko> |
Component: | kernel | Assignee: | Tomas Henzl <thenzl> |
Status: | CLOSED INSUFFICIENT_DATA | QA Contact: | Red Hat Kernel QE team <kernel-qe> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | low | ||
Version: | 5.4 | CC: | shawn.stephens |
Target Milestone: | rc | Flags: | khorenko:
needinfo+
|
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2013-03-27 13:46:09 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Konstantin Khorenko
2010-02-01 14:07:15 UTC
Hi Konstantin, this is now a quite old kernel, could you please try to look if a RHEL5.9 kernel shows the problem too? Thanks, Tomas Hi Tomas, i've explained the problem and showed the place where (most probably) allocations which trigger the problem are done. So the question is - did you fix anything around this place so it really makes sense to try new driver version? Unfortunately the node (if it's still working under 2.6.18-x kernel, cause the bug was filed 3 years(!) ago) was in production and it would be great to have at least a minimal belief that checking (and causing the downtime for server for reboot + possible OOM in the future) is worth to do. Thank you. (In reply to comment #2) > Hi Tomas, > i've explained the problem and showed the place where (most probably) > allocations which trigger the problem are done. Yes the analysis is great. What are 'Parallels Virtuozzo Containers kernels' and how they are different from our kernels? > > So the question is - did you fix anything around this place so it really > makes sense to try new driver version? Actually, it is hard to say, I can't remember of a specific patch for this issue, but there were so many changes in this driver, that knowing that it touches the latest version really makes sense. > the bug was filed 3 years(!) ago) It is unfortunate^, but it happens sometimes, that nobody notices a bugreport. Please next time contact our support directly, the response times are much better... Tomas Hi Tomas, (In reply to comment #3) > What are 'Parallels Virtuozzo Containers kernels' and how they are different > from our kernels? Parallels Virtuozzo Containers kernel is a kernel based on Red Hat Enterprise Linux kernel, we take RHEL kernel as a base and add the virtualization part which allows to run isolated Containers on the Node. Usually we do not touch drivers part at all, so in the driver part PVC kernels can be safely considered identical to RHEL's ones. > Actually, it is hard to say, I can't remember of a specific patch for this > issue, but there were so many changes in this driver, that knowing that it > touches the latest version really makes sense. Yes, i agree. Unfortunately the node question was already upgraded to 2.6.32-x based kernel, so no way to reproduce the issue. i believe we can close the issue as obsoleted now. If we ever face this again, we'll file another bug. Thank you. (In reply to comment #4) > Hi Tomas, > > (In reply to comment #3) > > > What are 'Parallels Virtuozzo Containers kernels' and how they are different > > from our kernels? > > Parallels Virtuozzo Containers kernel is a kernel based on Red Hat > Enterprise Linux kernel, we take RHEL kernel as a base and add the > virtualization part which allows to run isolated Containers on the Node. > > Usually we do not touch drivers part at all, so in the driver part PVC > kernels can be safely considered identical to RHEL's ones. > > > > Actually, it is hard to say, I can't remember of a specific patch for this > > issue, but there were so many changes in this driver, that knowing that it > > touches the latest version really makes sense. > > Yes, i agree. > Unfortunately the node question was already upgraded to 2.6.32-x based > kernel, so no way to reproduce the issue. i believe we can close the issue > as obsoleted now. > If we ever face this again, we'll file another bug. Sure, thank you. I'll close this bug now, further debugging seems to be impossible. Again, thank you for cooperation. > > Thank you. |