Re: [uml-devel] No Bug Here: [Was: Expected SIGSTOP persists in 2.4.26-3um ]

["D. Bahi" <dbahi@enterasys.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1459 bytes --]

here is the last bread crumb trail i can think of -

we're loading modules with our stuff and i wasn't loading modules
in the kernel.org + UML massive launches.

it seems in our stuff that mem=1024 leads, not only to more
frequent encounters of launch SIGSTOP, but also, runtime
random kernel panics (stack overflow) (unhandled irq). (we used
to use mem=512 with 2.4.24-1um (it wouldn't do HIGHMEM either)).

light bulbs?

(i'm going to try building some modules for the vanilla stuff
but there have to be others out there using modules in their
UMLs --- is anybody else seeing these?)

D. Bahi wrote:

> no sir. the versions were correct. and the reboot-patch was applied
> to the 2.4.24-1um kernel - this i originally reported as fixed, but
> in later runs it showed up again... sigh.
> 
> the errors reported were those versions w/patches mentioned + all
> our mods. more recent testing with just kernel.org + UML leads
> to believe this is something we're inducing... so should not be
> reported against what everyone else is playing with.
> 
> Jeff Dike wrote:
> 
>> dbahi@enterasys.com said:
>>
>>> I withdraw this error report against 2.4.26-3um against any plain
>>> vanilla UML kernel for that matter. 
>>
>>
>>
>> Is it possible you were mistaken about the versions, or whether the 
>> reboot-signals patch was present?
>>
>>                 Jeff
>>
> 

-- 
Damn it! Morons don't learn until they die! -- Faye Valentine, _Cowboy Bebop, The 
Movie_.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 187 bytes --]