[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1172852957.12220.4.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2007 10:29:16 -0600
From: Adam Litke <agl@...ibm.com>
To: Bill Irwin <bill.irwin@...cle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: Kernel Oops with shm namespace cleanups
On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 16:08 -0800, Bill Irwin wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2007 at 02:13:29PM -0600, Adam Litke wrote:
> > Hey. While testing 2.6.21-rc2 with libhugetlbfs, the shm-fork test case
> > causes the kernel to oops. To reproduce: Execute 'make check' in the
> > latest libhugetlbfs source on a 2.6.21-rc2 kernel with 100 huge pages
> > allocated. Using fewer huge pages will likely also trigger the oops.
> > Libhugetlbfs can be downloaded from:
> > http://libhugetlbfs.ozlabs.org/snapshots/libhugetlbfs-dev-20070228.tar.gz
>
> Looks like I should grab these testcases for the sake of due diligence
> (not to say I intend to alter maintenance style from primarily review,
> approval, and bugfixing, not that I've been doing as much of any of those
> as I should). To which architectures and/or distributions have the
> userspace bits been ported, or otherwise run/tested on? A quick sniff
> test on an Altix suggests SLES and/or ia64 may trip up the scripts:
Right now we support x86, powerpc, and x86_64. Segment remapping and
hugetlb malloc won't work on ia64 until long format vhpt is supported (I
suspect). But the test framework should be adaptable to other
architectures.
--
Adam Litke - (agl at us.ibm.com)
IBM Linux Technology Center
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists