From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761489AbYHEPuR (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Aug 2008 11:50:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755583AbYHEPuA (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Aug 2008 11:50:00 -0400 Received: from mtagate3.uk.ibm.com ([195.212.29.136]:24462 "EHLO mtagate3.uk.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755495AbYHEPt7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Aug 2008 11:49:59 -0400 Subject: Re: s390 hugetlb oops with libhugetlbfs test-suite From: Gerald Schaefer To: Nishanth Aravamudan Cc: schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, LKML , agl@us.ibm.com In-Reply-To: <20080729214638.GA20641@us.ibm.com> References: <20080725211035.GA19738@us.ibm.com> <20080726033254.GA3810@us.ibm.com> <20080726034127.GA8338@us.ibm.com> <1217352163.4829.25.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080729214638.GA20641@us.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2008 17:49:32 +0200 Message-Id: <1217951372.5032.21.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.3 (2.12.3-8.el5_2.2) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2008-07-29 at 14:46 -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: > Beyond the counters case, I saw one other issue on s390 (haven't > confirmed if it happens anywhere else), the icache-hygiene test, when > run manually a few times, will fail every so often claiming that one of > the mmap()s returned ENOMEM. I haven't had time to track that down yet, > but it might be because of the address space layout and the size of the > hugepage on s390. I have posted a patch that will fix the counters oops. So far, I could not reproduce the icache-hygiene problem, did you use hardware large page support or software emulation? But I probably noticed a similar one: map_high_truncate_2 (32): FAIL mmap() 1: Cannot allocate memory That one should be because of the 31-bit address space layout on s390, as it tries to mmap too much (1.5GB). I also noticed that task-size-overrun (64) seems to hang up on my system, I can only continue after ctrl+c, can you verify that? Thanks, Gerald