From Bugzilla Helper: User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.01; Windows NT 5.0; DigExt) Within the first hour of starting cerberus( both cts 1.2.1 and 1.2.15) on systems running RC1, kernel reports: "__alloc_pages: 0-order allocation failed" Happens only on systems with > 1 GB of RAM This has occurred on: system RAM swap kernel ----------------------------------------- pe1300 1GB 512MB smp pe1550 1GB 512MB smp pe1400 2GB 4GB smp/up pe4400 3.5GB 512MB smp pe6350 1GB 512MB smp A pe2400 w/ 512MB RAM and 70MB of swap space (created with auto- partitioning) has worked without error. All systems have been running of onboard scsi or 39160 scsi card. During error on machine w/ 2GB ram and 4GB swap, top reports all but 3-5MB of ram in use, and only 2GB of 4GB swap in use. After receiving this error, rebooting the machine will hang at "Turning off swap" Reproducible: Sometimes Steps to Reproduce: 1.Install > 1 GB of RAM 2. Run VA Linux Cerberus Test (1.2.1 or 1.2.15) 3. program will fail with error Actual Results: "__alloc_pages: 0-order allocation failed" message received Expected Results: No errors
Known problem, reproducible here. I'm already investigating.
Hi- I am not sure if this is related to this bug, but I have a Supermicro 370DL3 mb with 1 gig of memory. After install, a look at gtop (or top) shows that the system is only recognizing *64* megs. This mb has the Serverworks ServerSet III LE chipset, not sure if that has anything to do with it. Am curious to see if the fix for this works for me, though it appears that my error is with detection at the install phase. Regards- Bill Kersey
Detection problems are entirely separate from the performance problems we are seeing: please open a separate bugzilla report for that. Thanks!
The worst of the VM performance problems of this nature are fixed in CVS, but are not enabled on all builds as we are still chasing other VM problems. Expect a VM balancing test kernel build tonight or tomorrow for beta testers to try.
"0-order allocation failed" is informative, but the system doesn't fail. Could we change the debugging level of this message? We're concerned that customers will see the word "failed" and call for support.
we will soften the level of the warning.
Changed severity from "error condition" to "informational, non significant". Will show up in syslog, not on the screen.