Quoting Jean-Marc Pigeon (j...@safe.ca):
> Hello Serge,
> 
>       Thanks for the small test, I do confirm
>       there is the same problem here with it, 
>       as soon started the program use ALL available 
>       CPU cycle (minus some few %) and NEVER
>       EVER come back from "clone" function.
>       The ONLY way I found to recover the
>       system is to power it down (sic!).
> 
>       See attachment, your program, the 
>       .config file, and cpu information
>       (I put back your test too, (done 
>        cosmetic changes only)).
> 
>       Once again, clone call on 2.6.32.3
>       is working fine.
> 
>       Sorry to bother the list, I was "expecting"
>       a Stack size problem, but I increase
>       your value from 4 to 10, with the same result.
>       Hopefully it could be something I overlooked
>       with my Kernel config file, if someone
>       want to have a look I attached it.
> 
>       My guess for now it is something within
>       the clone code specific to i386.
>       
>       I 'll try to pin point within the 
>       clone code.
> 
>       (could someone check tstclone.c under 
>        i386 arch and confirm trouble?)

I just tried it on a x86-32 kvm image with no hang (cut-n-paste
from your copy of testclone.c).

Could you:

        1. use cpusets and memory limiter to limit the
           shell fromwhich you run testclone to 1 cpu and
           1/3 of your ram,
        2. fire up testclone
        3. gdb -se testclone -p `pidof testclone` in another
           shell and see whether anything is hung in userspace?

If you need more specific hints pls let me know.

Also, you might try with selinux disabled ('setenforce 0'), though
I don't see how it can be responsible.

-serge
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
contain...@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers

_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel@openvz.org
https://openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Reply via email to