Re: new MM and shared memory
Rik van Riel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 19 Sep 2000, Christoph Rohland wrote: > > > As stated before the new mm does break shm swapping. > > Under the ipctst program driving my machine into swap I get the > > appended console output. After this it locked up. > > > > I can make it run longer by giving mem= with less memory. > > Since I changed absolutely nothing to the shm_swap() > functions, I guess this means that sometimes shm_swap() > is not called by the system even when it should have been. Yes, apparently shm swapping is very sensible to balancing issues. It behaves very differently with different patch levels without ever changing the shm_swap function. We should really work on integrating it into the page cache... Greetings Christoph -- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: new MM and shared memory
On 19 Sep 2000, Christoph Rohland wrote: > As stated before the new mm does break shm swapping. > Under the ipctst program driving my machine into swap I get the > appended console output. After this it locked up. > > I can make it run longer by giving mem= with less memory. Since I changed absolutely nothing to the shm_swap() functions, I guess this means that sometimes shm_swap() is not called by the system even when it should have been. (at least, this is what a debugging test by one of the other testers suggests) I will look into this and come up with a fix. regards, Rik -- "What you're running that piece of shit Gnome?!?!" -- Miguel de Icaza, UKUUG 2000 http://www.conectiva.com/ http://www.surriel.com/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: new MM and shared memory
On 19 Sep 2000, Christoph Rohland wrote: As stated before the new mm does break shm swapping. Under the ipctst program driving my machine into swap I get the appended console output. After this it locked up. I can make it run longer by giving mem= with less memory. Since I changed absolutely nothing to the shm_swap() functions, I guess this means that sometimes shm_swap() is not called by the system even when it should have been. (at least, this is what a debugging test by one of the other testers suggests) I will look into this and come up with a fix. regards, Rik -- "What you're running that piece of shit Gnome?!?!" -- Miguel de Icaza, UKUUG 2000 http://www.conectiva.com/ http://www.surriel.com/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: new MM and shared memory
Rik van Riel [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On 19 Sep 2000, Christoph Rohland wrote: As stated before the new mm does break shm swapping. Under the ipctst program driving my machine into swap I get the appended console output. After this it locked up. I can make it run longer by giving mem= with less memory. Since I changed absolutely nothing to the shm_swap() functions, I guess this means that sometimes shm_swap() is not called by the system even when it should have been. Yes, apparently shm swapping is very sensible to balancing issues. It behaves very differently with different patch levels without ever changing the shm_swap function. We should really work on integrating it into the page cache... Greetings Christoph -- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
