[Bug 280846] Low memory freezes / OOM: a thread waited too long to allocate a page
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 21:01:11 UTC
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=280846 --- Comment #45 from Mark Johnston <markj@FreeBSD.org> --- (In reply to Mark Millard from comment #44) Yes, I will commit the changes to main this week and MFC with a short timeout. (In reply to Henrich Hartzer from comment #42) Laundry pages are dirty memory that can only be reclaimed by saving a copy to some swap space. firefox will generate quite a lot of it. I'd hope that 8GB of RAM is enough to run firefox, but it's been a long time since I ran a desktop with less than 16/32GB. On my desktop, firefox is consuming a "healthy" amount of memory. It's not easy to see how memory is shared among different firefox processes, but its total memory usage is definitely less than the sum of the RES column: 251 markj 37 23 0 9331M 2663M select 3 483:17 13.66% firefox 274 markj 30 23 0 4743M 871M select 10 165:13 9.64% firefox 245 markj 95 20 0 17G 3617M select 0 41.9H 1.94% firefox 66817 markj 34 20 0 8444M 784M select 1 113:04 1.76% firefox 86228 markj 29 20 0 2928M 542M select 0 0:09 1.35% firefox 86836 markj 30 20 0 3463M 722M select 9 1:31 1.00% firefox 257 markj 32 20 0 3873M 864M select 7 150:33 0.64% firefox 88325 markj 31 20 0 2502M 178M select 11 0:00 0.52% firefox 249 markj 29 20 0 23G 1525M select 2 173:56 0.36% firefox 268 markj 32 21 0 5655M 1197M select 5 377:49 0.29% firefox 273 markj 30 20 0 4656M 966M select 7 151:09 0.18% firefox 83201 markj 28 20 0 2634M 297M select 8 0:24 0.17% firefox 256 markj 29 20 0 3444M 555M select 0 47:48 0.16% firefox 262 markj 29 20 0 3599M 558M select 4 58:56 0.14% firefox 76703 markj 29 20 0 2651M 301M select 4 0:54 0.12% firefox 252 markj 29 20 0 5898M 1023M select 8 40:35 0.12% firefox 87306 markj 29 20 0 2624M 274M select 9 0:18 0.11% firefox 10355 markj 27 20 0 2946M 384M select 8 12:39 0.09% firefox 258 markj 29 20 0 2671M 247M select 9 39:37 0.08% firefox 291 markj 38 20 0 4034M 766M select 9 97:15 0.04% firefox 279 markj 31 20 0 4559M 659M select 7 109:57 0.03% firefox 255 markj 29 20 0 3729M 658M select 0 44:00 0.03% firefox 59901 markj 28 20 0 2882M 469M select 2 6:20 0.01% firefox 253 markj 32 20 0 4738M 931M select 5 44:53 0.01% firefox 98743 markj 27 20 0 3154M 509M select 4 3:28 0.00% firefox 86990 markj 29 20 0 2760M 388M select 8 0:08 0.00% firefox 266 markj 5 20 0 869M 241M select 5 98:24 0.00% firefox 261 markj 29 20 0 3021M 375M select 6 64:42 0.00% firefox 259 markj 5 20 0 383M 137M select 1 32:56 0.00% firefox 250 markj 28 20 0 4044M 783M select 1 9:10 0.00% firefox 248 markj 6 20 0 267M 121M select 7 5:35 0.00% firefox 79393 markj 33 20 0 7544M 1803M select 4 5:23 0.00% firefox 10361 markj 28 20 0 2532M 181M select 10 3:11 0.00% firefox 71850 markj 27 20 0 2556M 212M select 5 0:06 0.00% firefox 71892 markj 28 20 0 2521M 192M select 6 0:05 0.00% firefox 88241 markj 31 20 0 2502M 180M select 8 0:00 0.00% firefox 88409 markj 19 21 0 2447M 172M select 8 0:00 0.00% firefox 88352 markj 19 20 0 2447M 172M select 9 0:00 0.00% firefox 88410 markj 19 21 0 2447M 172M select 2 0:00 0.00% firefox That said, the memory usage is certainly substantial. Userspace memory leaks are also certainly a possibility, though I haven't seen one in firefox in quite a while. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.