Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 17 May 2004 01:53:10 +0200 | From | Andrea Arcangeli <> | Subject | Re: 1352 NUL bytes at the end of a page? (was Re: Assertion `s && s->tree' failed: The saga continues.) |
| |
On Sun, May 16, 2004 at 04:11:16PM -0600, Steven Cole wrote: > On Sunday 16 May 2004 03:29 pm, Andrew Morton wrote: > > Steven Cole <elenstev@mesatop.com> wrote: > > > > > > Anyway, although the regression for my particular machine for this > > > particular load may be interesting, the good news is that I've seen > > > none of the failures which started this whole thread, which are relatively > > > easily reproduceable with PREEMPT set. > > > > So... would it be correct to say that with CONFIG_PREEMPT, ppp or its > > underlying driver stack > > > > a) screws up the connection and hangs and > > > > b) scribbles on pagecache? > > > > Because if so, the same will probably happen on SMP. > > > Perhaps someone has the hardware to test this. > > To summarize my experience with the past 24 hours of testing: > Without PREEMPT , everything is rock solid.
so we've two separate problems: the first is the ppp instability with preempt, the second is a regresion in the vm heuristics between 2.6.3 and 2.6.5.
> and I (cringes at the thought) may repeat some bk pulls with > PREEMPT set.
I've heard other reports of preempt being unstable with some sound stuff, just in case are you using sound drivers at all during that workload? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |