lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 11:29:01 +0100 From: Frans Pop <elendil@...net.nl> To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com> Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>, Sven Geggus <lists@...hsschwanzdomain.de>, Karol Lewandowski <karol.k.lewandowski@...il.com>, Tobias Oetiker <tobi@...iker.ch>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>, Kalle Valo <kalle.valo@....fi>, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, Mohamed Abbas <mohamed.abbas@...el.com>, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>, "John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>, Stephan von Krawczynski <skraw@...net.com>, Kernel Testers List <kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] ONLY-APPLY-IF-STILL-FAILING Revert 373c0a7e, 8aa7e847: Fix congestion_wait() sync/async vs read/write confusion On Tuesday 27 October 2009, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > Oops. no, please no. > 8aa7e847 is regression fixing commit. this revert indicate the > regression occur again. > if we really need to revert it, we need to revert 1faa16d2287 too. > however, I doubt this commit really cause regression to iwlan. IOW, > I agree Jens. This is not intended as a patch for mainline, but just as a test to see if it improves things. It may be a regression fix, but it also creates a significant change in behavior during swapping in my test case. If a fix is needed, it will probably by different from this revert. Please read: http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/10/26/510. This mail has some data: http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/10/26/455. > I hope to try reproduce this problem on my test environment. Can anyone > please explain reproduce way? Please see my mails in this thread for bug #14141: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/896714 You will probably need to read some of them to understand the context of the two mails linked above. The most relevant ones are (all from the same thread; not sure why gmane gives such weird links): http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.mm/39909 http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.kernel-testers/7228 http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.kernel-testers/7165 > Is special hardware necessary? Not special hardware, but you may need an encrypted partition and NFS; the test may need to be modified according to the amount of memory you have. I think it should be possible to reproduce the freezes I see while ignoring the SKB allocation errors as IMO those are just a symptom, not the cause. So you should not need wireless. The severity of the freezes during my test often increases if the test is repeated (without rebooting). Cheers, FJP -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists