Re: Google's mm problem - not reproduced on 2.4.13

From: Ben Smith (ben@google.com)
Date: Wed Oct 31 2001 - 20:17:53 EST

Next message: Kurt Roeckx: "Re: PROBLEM: Linux updates RTC secretly when clock synchronizes"
Previous message: Ralf Baechle: "Re: Discontinuous memory!!"
In reply to: Daniel Phillips: "Re: Google's mm problem - not reproduced on 2.4.13"
Next in thread: Rik van Riel: "Re: Google's mm problem - not reproduced on 2.4.13"
Reply: Rik van Riel: "Re: Google's mm problem - not reproduced on 2.4.13"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

> *Just in case* it's oom-related I've asked Ben to try it with one less than
> the maximum number of memory blocks he can allocate.

I've run this test with my 3.5G machine, 3 blocks instead of 4 blocks,
and it has the same behavior (my app gets killed, 0-order allocation
failures, and the system stays up.
- Ben

Ben Smith
Google, Inc

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Kurt Roeckx: "Re: PROBLEM: Linux updates RTC secretly when clock synchronizes"
Previous message: Ralf Baechle: "Re: Discontinuous memory!!"
In reply to: Daniel Phillips: "Re: Google's mm problem - not reproduced on 2.4.13"
Next in thread: Rik van Riel: "Re: Google's mm problem - not reproduced on 2.4.13"
Reply: Rik van Riel: "Re: Google's mm problem - not reproduced on 2.4.13"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Oct 31 2001 - 21:00:47 EST