Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Thu, 11 Nov 2010 07:52:54 -0500 | From | Christoph Hellwig <> | Subject | Re: [2.6.37-rc1, OOM] virtblk: OOM in do_virtblk_request() |
| |
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 11:16:48AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 12:01:51 am Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Rusty, Michael, > > > > any comments? I think Dave's observation is correct, and the lack of > > a mempool for allocations in the virtio stack is a no-go for virtio_blk. > > Interesting. virtio will try to fall back to using direct ring entries > if it can, but if course if your request is too large it can never do that. > > So, we could add a memory pool, or restrict the request size in virtio_blk.
The mempool looks like the more generic solution. Especially as people are still talking about swap over nfs, at which point virtio-net will show the same issue (just even harder to reproduce)
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |