[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51507301.3050601@surriel.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 11:53:37 -0400
From: Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>
To: Emmanuel Benisty <benisty.e@...il.com>
CC: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@...com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, hhuang@...hat.com,
"Low, Jason" <jason.low2@...com>,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
Larry Woodman <lwoodman@...hat.com>,
"Vinod, Chegu" <chegu_vinod@...com>
Subject: Re: ipc,sem: sysv semaphore scalability
On 03/25/2013 11:20 AM, Emmanuel Benisty wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 9:03 PM, Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com> wrote:
>>>> With the first four patches only, I got some X server freeze (just
>>>> tried once).
>>>
>>>
>>> Could you try booting with panic=1 so the kernel panics on the first
>>> oops?
>>
>>
>> Sorry that should be "oops=panic"
>>
>>
>>> Maybe that way (if we are lucky) we will be able to capture the first
>>> oops, and maybe get an idea of what causes the problem.
>
> Sorry Rik, I get all kind of weird behaviors (wireless dies, compiling
> gets stuck and is impossible to kill, can't kill X) with the 4
> patches+oops=panic but no trace. Here after is 7+1 patches with
> oops=panic boot: http://i.imgur.com/1jep1qx.jpg
This may be a stupid question, but you re-compile and re-install
the kernel modules every time you changed the kernel?
The behaviour you report with just the first four patches is so
random, it sounds almost like a mismatched data structure between
compiles...
--
All rights reversed.
--
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