Hi Kevin,
On 19 Dec 2000, Kevin Buhr wrote:
> The code in Enlightenment did a complete
> shmget/shmat/shmctl(RMID)/shmdt cycle, so that segment *was* being
> constantly deleted. The Mozilla ones stuck around. The particular
> address that was being reference in the shm_nopage_core call
>
Christoph Rohland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> I am just running a stress test on 2.4.0-test13-pre3 + appended patch
> without problems. Is the shm segment deleted sometimes or is it always
> the same segment?
IIRC, in my particular crash case, the Enlightenment window manager
was using the
Hi Kevin,
On 26 Nov 2000, Kevin Buhr wrote:
> The fact that this has crashed once in all the time I've been using
> this setup would seem to imply a very subtle race condition. Ugh.
I am just running a stress test on 2.4.0-test13-pre3 + appended patch
without problems. Is the shm segment
Hi Kevin,
On 26 Nov 2000, Kevin Buhr wrote:
The fact that this has crashed once in all the time I've been using
this setup would seem to imply a very subtle race condition. Ugh.
I am just running a stress test on 2.4.0-test13-pre3 + appended patch
without problems. Is the shm segment deleted
Christoph Rohland [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I am just running a stress test on 2.4.0-test13-pre3 + appended patch
without problems. Is the shm segment deleted sometimes or is it always
the same segment?
IIRC, in my particular crash case, the Enlightenment window manager
was using the X
Hi Kevin,
On 19 Dec 2000, Kevin Buhr wrote:
The code in Enlightenment did a complete
shmget/shmat/shmctl(RMID)/shmdt cycle, so that segment *was* being
constantly deleted. The Mozilla ones stuck around. The particular
address that was being reference in the shm_nopage_core call
Christoph Rohland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I use a SysReq patch to do an oops-style dump instead of the usual
> > "showPc" function, so I was able to copy a stack dump down.
>
> Could you send me the patch? Does it do the dump on all cpus?
You can grab it at:
Hi Kevin,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kevin Buhr) writes:
> I know no way to reproduce it. I've been using "test5" reliably since
> just after its release, and I've triggered this bug only the one time.
That's what I feared :-(
> I use a SysReq patch to do an oops-style dump instead of the usual
>
Hi Kevin,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kevin Buhr) writes:
I know no way to reproduce it. I've been using "test5" reliably since
just after its release, and I've triggered this bug only the one time.
That's what I feared :-(
I use a SysReq patch to do an oops-style dump instead of the usual
Christoph Rohland [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I use a SysReq patch to do an oops-style dump instead of the usual
"showPc" function, so I was able to copy a stack dump down.
Could you send me the patch? Does it do the dump on all cpus?
You can grab it at:
Christoph Rohland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> This is the first report of such corruption. If it's real it is _not_
> fixed between test5 and test11. There is probably no way to reproduce
> it since you ask if it's fixed in test11, right?
I know no way to reproduce it. I've been using
Hi Kevin,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kevin Buhr) writes:
> The SHM locking has thwarted my attempts at understanding. Maybe
> someone else can see the bug or reassure me that it's already been
> fixed in test11?
This is the first report of such corruption. If it's real it is _not_
fixed between test5
Hi Kevin,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kevin Buhr) writes:
The SHM locking has thwarted my attempts at understanding. Maybe
someone else can see the bug or reassure me that it's already been
fixed in test11?
This is the first report of such corruption. If it's real it is _not_
fixed between test5 and
I've been chasing after a bug in 2.4.0-test5 that I can't quite nail
down. I don't see anything obvious between test5 and test11 that
leads me to believe it's been fixed.
I encountered a lockup on my SMP box. One CPU got stuck in a spinlock
via the following call trace. There were enough args
I've been chasing after a bug in 2.4.0-test5 that I can't quite nail
down. I don't see anything obvious between test5 and test11 that
leads me to believe it's been fixed.
I encountered a lockup on my SMP box. One CPU got stuck in a spinlock
via the following call trace. There were enough args
15 matches
Mail list logo
