Re: Problem with 2.4.0-test9-pre6 seems to be SHM

From: David Ford (david@kalifornia.com)
Date: Sat Sep 23 2000 - 18:26:20 EDT

  • Next message: David Ford: "Re: Problem with 2.4.0-test9-pre6 seems to be SHM"

    19.5 day uptime on test8 and 4.01b, ~13 segments, ~350K all user 'david'.
    4 day uptime on test8 and 4.01c, ~16 segments, 256 bytes used by user
    'postgres'.

    test9 is very broken, we know it is :]

    There are a bunch of OOPSes and complaints about the VM.

    -d

    safemode wrote:

    > Ok, compiling using a cvs of X i got a couple hours ago, I'm just
    > wondering what the average segment number is for SHM on an X session
    > that has been up for a while .... i'll get back with any sort of info
    > on if the SHM problem has been solved with this latest CVS or if it
    > continues to look like a kernel SHM problem. So far though,
    > 2.4.0-test8-vm3 is handling the problem Quite well as opposed to test9,
    > which died in 2 hours upon booting ...and it didn't have the added
    > stress of compiling X.

    --
    "The difference between 'involvement' and 'commitment' is like an
    eggs-and-ham breakfast: the chicken was 'involved' - the pig was
    'committed'."
    


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



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 23 2000 - 18:29:07 EDT