Rik van Riel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 2 Oct 2000, Christoph Rohland wrote:
>
> > the shm swapping still kills the machine(8GB mem) the machine
> > with somthing like '__alloc_pages failed order 0'.
> >
> > When I do the same stresstest with mmaped file in ext2 the
> > machine runs fine
Rik van Riel [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 2 Oct 2000, Christoph Rohland wrote:
the shm swapping still kills the machine(8GB mem) the machine
with somthing like '__alloc_pages failed order 0'.
When I do the same stresstest with mmaped file in ext2 the
machine runs fine but the
On 2 Oct 2000, Christoph Rohland wrote:
> the shm swapping still kills the machine(8GB mem) the machine
> with somthing like '__alloc_pages failed order 0'.
>
> When I do the same stresstest with mmaped file in ext2 the
> machine runs fine but the processes do not do anything and
> vmstat/ps
Hi Rik,
the shm swapping still kills the machine(8GB mem) the machine with
somthing like '__alloc_pages failed order 0'.
When I do the same stresstest with mmaped file in ext2 the machine
runs fine but the processes do not do anything and vmstat/ps lock up
on these processes.
Greetings
On Mon, 2 Oct 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 02, 2000 at 12:42:47AM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > --- linux-2.4.0-test9-pre7/fs/buffer.c.orig Sat Sep 30 18:09:18 2000
> > +++ linux-2.4.0-test9-pre7/fs/buffer.c Mon Oct 2 00:19:41 2000
> > @@ -706,7 +706,9 @@
> > static void
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 02, 2000 at 12:42:47AM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
> --- linux-2.4.0-test9-pre7/fs/buffer.c.orig Sat Sep 30 18:09:18 2000
> +++ linux-2.4.0-test9-pre7/fs/buffer.cMon Oct 2 00:19:41 2000
> @@ -706,7 +706,9 @@
> static void refill_freelist(int size)
> {
> if
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 02, 2000 at 12:42:47AM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
--- linux-2.4.0-test9-pre7/fs/buffer.c.orig Sat Sep 30 18:09:18 2000
+++ linux-2.4.0-test9-pre7/fs/buffer.cMon Oct 2 00:19:41 2000
@@ -706,7 +706,9 @@
static void refill_freelist(int size)
{
if
On Mon, 2 Oct 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Oct 02, 2000 at 12:42:47AM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
--- linux-2.4.0-test9-pre7/fs/buffer.c.orig Sat Sep 30 18:09:18 2000
+++ linux-2.4.0-test9-pre7/fs/buffer.c Mon Oct 2 00:19:41 2000
@@ -706,7 +706,9 @@
static void
Hi Rik,
the shm swapping still kills the machine(8GB mem) the machine with
somthing like '__alloc_pages failed order 0'.
When I do the same stresstest with mmaped file in ext2 the machine
runs fine but the processes do not do anything and vmstat/ps lock up
on these processes.
Greetings
On 2 Oct 2000, Christoph Rohland wrote:
the shm swapping still kills the machine(8GB mem) the machine
with somthing like '__alloc_pages failed order 0'.
When I do the same stresstest with mmaped file in ext2 the
machine runs fine but the processes do not do anything and
vmstat/ps lock up
Hi,
The attached patch seems to fix all the reported deadlock
problems with the new VM. Basically they could be grouped
into 2 categories:
1) __GFP_IO related locking issues
2) something sleeps on a free/clean/inactive page goal
that isn't worked towards
The patch has survived some heavy
Hi,
The attached patch seems to fix all the reported deadlock
problems with the new VM. Basically they could be grouped
into 2 categories:
1) __GFP_IO related locking issues
2) something sleeps on a free/clean/inactive page goal
that isn't worked towards
The patch has survived some heavy
12 matches
Mail list logo
