Dear Simon,
So if he config sparse memory, the issue can be solved I think.
In my config file I have:
CONFIG_HAVE_SPARSE_IRQ=y
CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ=y
CONFIG_ARCH_SPARSEMEM_ENABLE=y
# CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_MANUAL is not set
CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_STATIC=y
# CONFIG_INPUT_SPARSEKMAP is not set
#
On 01/14/2013 11:00 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
On 01/11/2013 07:31 PM, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
Seems that any i386 PAE machine will go OOM just by running a few
processes. To reproduce:
sh -c 'n=0; while [ $n -lt 1 ]; do sleep 600 ((n=n+1)); done'
My machine has 64GB RAM. With
On Thu 2013-01-31 23:38:27, Phil Turmel wrote:
On 01/31/2013 10:13 PM, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
[trim /] Does not that prove that PAE is broken?
Please, Paul, take *yes* for an answer. It is broken. You've received
multiple dissertations on why it is going to stay that way. Unless
Dear Ben,
Thanks for the repeated explanations.
PAE was a stop-gap ...
... [PAE] completely untenable.
Is this a good time to withdraw PAE, to tell the world that it does not
work? Maybe you should have had such comments in the code.
Seems that amd64 now works somewhat: on Debian the
On Thu, 2013-01-31 at 20:07 +1100, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
Dear Ben,
Thanks for the repeated explanations.
PAE was a stop-gap ...
... [PAE] completely untenable.
Is this a good time to withdraw PAE, to tell the world that it does not
work? Maybe you should have had such
Dear Ben,
Based on your experience I might propose to change the automatic kernel
selection for i386 so that we use 'amd64' on a system with 16GB RAM and
a capable processor.
Don't you mean change to amd64 for 4GB (or any RAM), never using PAE?
PAE is broken for any amount of RAM. More
Dear Ben,
(Removing the mailing lists
linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org linux...@kvack.org
from CC, as this may be of no interest to them.)
Seems that amd64 now works somewhat: on Debian the linux-image package
is tricky to install,
If you do an i386 (userland) installation then you must either
On Fri, 2013-02-01 at 10:06 +1100, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
Dear Ben,
Based on your experience I might propose to change the automatic kernel
selection for i386 so that we use 'amd64' on a system with 16GB RAM and
a capable processor.
Don't you mean change to amd64 for 4GB (or
Dear Ben,
PAE is broken for any amount of RAM.
No it isn't.
Could I please ask you to expand on that?
Thanks, Paul
Paul Szabo p...@maths.usyd.edu.au http://www.maths.usyd.edu.au/u/psz/
School of Mathematics and Statistics University of SydneyAustralia
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
On Fri, 2013-02-01 at 13:12 +1100, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
Dear Ben,
PAE is broken for any amount of RAM.
No it isn't.
Could I please ask you to expand on that?
I already did, a few messages back.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
Everything should be made as simple as possible, but
Dear Ben,
PAE is broken for any amount of RAM.
No it isn't.
Could I please ask you to expand on that?
I already did, a few messages back.
OK, thanks. Noting however that fewer than those back, I said:
... PAE with any RAM fails the sleep test:
n=0; while [ $n -lt 33000 ]; do sleep 600
On 01/31/2013 10:13 PM, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
[trim /] Does not that prove that PAE is broken?
Please, Paul, take *yes* for an answer. It is broken. You've received
multiple dissertations on why it is going to stay that way. Unless you
fix it yourself, and everyone seems to be
Hi!
I understand that more RAM leaves less lowmem. What is unacceptable is
that PAE crashes or freezes with OOM: it should gracefully handle the
issue. Noting that (for a machine with 4GB or under) PAE fails where the
HIGHMEM4G kernel succeeds and survives.
You have found a delta, but
On 01/30/2013 04:51 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
Are you saying that HIGHMEM configuration with 4GB ram is not expected
to work?
Not really.
The assertion was that 4GB with no PAE passed a forkbomb test (ooming)
while 4GB of RAM with PAE hung, thus _PAE_ is broken.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Dear Pavel and Dave,
The assertion was that 4GB with no PAE passed a forkbomb test (ooming)
while 4GB of RAM with PAE hung, thus _PAE_ is broken.
Yes, PAE is broken. Still, maybe the above needs slight correction:
non-PAE HIGHMEM4G passed the sleep test: no OOM, nothing unexpected;
whereas PAE
On Thu, 2013-01-31 at 06:40 +1100, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
Dear Pavel and Dave,
The assertion was that 4GB with no PAE passed a forkbomb test (ooming)
while 4GB of RAM with PAE hung, thus _PAE_ is broken.
Yes, PAE is broken. Still, maybe the above needs slight correction:
Dear Dave,
On my large machine, 'free' fails to show about 2GB memory ...
You probably have a memory hole. ...
The e820 map (during early boot in dmesg) or /proc/iomem will let you
locate your memory holes.
Now that my machine is running an amd64 kernel, 'free' shows total Mem
65854128 (up
On 01/17/2013 01:04 PM, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
On my large machine, 'free' fails to show about 2GB memory ...
You probably have a memory hole. ...
The e820 map (during early boot in dmesg) or /proc/iomem will let you
locate your memory holes.
Now that my machine is running an amd64
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 1:22 AM, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
Dear Sedat,
... it really makes sense to switch to x86_64
(amd64) architecture when you have a modern computer.
Switching makes even more sense when you have more than 4GiB RAM.
You seem to say that one should switch to amd64
Dear Sedat,
... it really makes sense to switch to x86_64
(amd64) architecture when you have a modern computer.
Switching makes even more sense when you have more than 4GiB RAM.
You seem to say that one should switch to amd64 (if hardware allows),
even with less than 4GB RAM (where 32-bit
Hi Paul,
paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
Dear Sedat,
... it really makes sense to switch to x86_64
(amd64) architecture when you have a modern computer.
Switching makes even more sense when you have more than 4GiB RAM.
You seem to say that one should switch to amd64 (if hardware allows),
On 01/11/2013 07:31 PM, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
Seems that any i386 PAE machine will go OOM just by running a few
processes. To reproduce:
sh -c 'n=0; while [ $n -lt 1 ]; do sleep 600 ((n=n+1)); done'
My machine has 64GB RAM. With previous OOM episodes, it seemed that
running
Dear Dave,
Seems that any i386 PAE machine will go OOM just by running a few
processes. To reproduce:
sh -c 'n=0; while [ $n -lt 1 ]; do sleep 600 ((n=n+1)); done'
...
I think what you're seeing here is that, as the amount of total memory
increases, the amount of lowmem available
On Tue, 2013-01-15 at 07:36 +1100, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
Dear Dave,
Seems that any i386 PAE machine will go OOM just by running a few
processes. To reproduce:
sh -c 'n=0; while [ $n -lt 1 ]; do sleep 600 ((n=n+1)); done'
...
I think what you're seeing here is that, as
On 01/14/2013 12:36 PM, paul.sz...@sydney.edu.au wrote:
I understand that more RAM leaves less lowmem. What is unacceptable is
that PAE crashes or freezes with OOM: it should gracefully handle the
issue. Noting that (for a machine with 4GB or under) PAE fails where the
HIGHMEM4G kernel
Dear Dave,
... What is unacceptable is that PAE crashes or freezes with OOM:
it should gracefully handle the issue. Noting that (for a machine
with 4GB or under) PAE fails where the HIGHMEM4G kernel succeeds ...
You have found a delta, but you're not really making apples-to-apples
The issue is a regression with PAE, reproduced and verified on Ubuntu,
on my home PC with 3GB RAM.
My PC was running kernel linux-image-3.2.0-35-generic so it showed:
psz@DellE520:~$ uname -a
Linux DellE520 3.2.0-35-generic #55-Ubuntu SMP Wed Dec 5 17:45:18 UTC 2012
i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
Reported to Ubuntu also:
PAE regression: OOM with just a few sleeps
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1098961
Cheers, Paul
Paul Szabo p...@maths.usyd.edu.au http://www.maths.usyd.edu.au/u/psz/
School of Mathematics and Statistics University of SydneyAustralia
Dear Linux-MM,
Seems that any i386 PAE machine will go OOM just by running a few
processes. To reproduce:
sh -c 'n=0; while [ $n -lt 1 ]; do sleep 600 ((n=n+1)); done'
My machine has 64GB RAM. With previous OOM episodes, it seemed that
running (booting) it with mem=32G might avoid OOM; but
29 matches
Mail list logo
