On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 09:04:53AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On (30/07/08 13:37), David Gibson didst pronounce:
> > While checking some other things, I noticed today that with a kernel
> > built from today's Linus tree the 'counters' testcase fails, at least
> > on powerpc.
> >
> > counters (32): FAIL Line 375: Bad HugePages_Total: expected 0,
> > actual 1
> > counters (64): FAIL Line 375: Bad HugePages_Total: expected 0,
> > actual 1
> >
> > I had a look at the code, but since I don't really understand how the
> > dynamic pool resizing stuff works, I couldn't figure out what was
> > going on. Somebody who understands this better should probably take a
> > look at this.
> >
>
> It's not dynamic pool resizing.
>
> Anything older than libhugetlbfs 2.0-pre1 will fail the counters
> test on 2.6.27-rc1. Private reserves are now accounted for and
> mmap() will return NULL if enough huge pages are not available to
> satisfy the mapping. The counters test expects no reserves to be
> taken for private mappings so it fails.
Um... but I thought I had 2.0-pre1. I pulled it yesterday.
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Libhugetlbfs-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libhugetlbfs-devel
