From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@denx.de>
Cc: Phil Turmel <philip@turmel.org>,
paul.szabo@sydney.edu.au, ben@decadent.org.uk,
dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: PAE problems was [RFC] Reproducible OOM with just a few sleeps
Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2013 08:57:21 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <510BF3F1.2050605@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130201102545.GA3053@amd.pavel.ucw.cz>
On 02/01/2013 02:25 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
>
> On Fri 2013-02-01 11:20:44, Pavel Machek wrote:
>> On Thu 2013-01-31 23:38:27, Phil Turmel wrote:
>>> On 01/31/2013 10:13 PM, paul.szabo@sydney.edu.au wrote:
>>>> [trim /] Does not that prove that PAE is broken?
>>>
>>> Please, Paul, take *yes* for an answer. It is broken. You've received
>>> multiple dissertations on why it is going to stay that way. Unless you
>>> fix it yourself, and everyone seems to be politely wishing you the best
>>> of luck with that.
>>
>> It is not Paul's job to fix PAE. It is job of whoever broke it to do
>> so.
>>
>> If it is broken with 2GB of RAM, it is clearly not the known "lowmem
>> starvation" issue, it is something else... and probably worth
>> debugging.
>>
>> So, Paul, if you have time and interest... Try to find some old kernel
>> version where sleep test works with PAE. Hopefully there is one. Then
>> do bisection... author of the patch should then fix it. (And if not,
>> at least you have patch you can revert.)
>>
>> rjw is worth cc-ing at that point.
>
> Ouch, and... IIRC (hpa should know for sure), PAE is neccessary for
> R^X support on x86, thus getting more common, not less. If it does not
> work, that's bad news.
>
> Actually, if PAE is known broken, it should probably get marked as
> such in Kconfig. That's sure to get some discussion started...
> Pavel
>
OK, so by the time this thread gets to me there is of course no
information in it.
The vast majority of all 32-bit kernels compiled these days are PAE, so
it would seem rather odd if PAE was totally broken.
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@denx.de>
Cc: Phil Turmel <philip@turmel.org>,
paul.szabo@sydney.edu.au, ben@decadent.org.uk,
dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: PAE problems was [RFC] Reproducible OOM with just a few sleeps
Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2013 08:57:21 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <510BF3F1.2050605@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130201102545.GA3053@amd.pavel.ucw.cz>
On 02/01/2013 02:25 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
>
> On Fri 2013-02-01 11:20:44, Pavel Machek wrote:
>> On Thu 2013-01-31 23:38:27, Phil Turmel wrote:
>>> On 01/31/2013 10:13 PM, paul.szabo@sydney.edu.au wrote:
>>>> [trim /] Does not that prove that PAE is broken?
>>>
>>> Please, Paul, take *yes* for an answer. It is broken. You've received
>>> multiple dissertations on why it is going to stay that way. Unless you
>>> fix it yourself, and everyone seems to be politely wishing you the best
>>> of luck with that.
>>
>> It is not Paul's job to fix PAE. It is job of whoever broke it to do
>> so.
>>
>> If it is broken with 2GB of RAM, it is clearly not the known "lowmem
>> starvation" issue, it is something else... and probably worth
>> debugging.
>>
>> So, Paul, if you have time and interest... Try to find some old kernel
>> version where sleep test works with PAE. Hopefully there is one. Then
>> do bisection... author of the patch should then fix it. (And if not,
>> at least you have patch you can revert.)
>>
>> rjw is worth cc-ing at that point.
>
> Ouch, and... IIRC (hpa should know for sure), PAE is neccessary for
> R^X support on x86, thus getting more common, not less. If it does not
> work, that's bad news.
>
> Actually, if PAE is known broken, it should probably get marked as
> such in Kconfig. That's sure to get some discussion started...
> Pavel
>
OK, so by the time this thread gets to me there is of course no
information in it.
The vast majority of all 32-bit kernels compiled these days are PAE, so
it would seem rather odd if PAE was totally broken.
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-01 16:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-12 3:31 [RFC] Reproducible OOM with just a few sleeps paul.szabo
2013-01-12 3:31 ` paul.szabo
2013-01-14 15:00 ` Dave Hansen
2013-01-14 15:00 ` Dave Hansen
2013-01-14 20:36 ` paul.szabo
2013-01-14 20:36 ` paul.szabo
2013-01-15 0:34 ` Bug#695182: " Ben Hutchings
2013-01-15 0:56 ` Dave Hansen
2013-01-15 0:56 ` Dave Hansen
2013-01-15 2:16 ` paul.szabo
2013-01-15 2:16 ` paul.szabo
2013-01-30 12:51 ` Pavel Machek
2013-01-30 12:51 ` Pavel Machek
2013-01-30 15:32 ` Dave Hansen
2013-01-30 15:32 ` Dave Hansen
2013-01-30 19:40 ` paul.szabo
2013-01-30 19:40 ` paul.szabo
2013-01-31 5:15 ` Bug#695182: " Ben Hutchings
2013-01-31 9:07 ` paul.szabo
2013-01-31 9:07 ` paul.szabo
2013-01-31 13:38 ` Ben Hutchings
2013-01-31 23:06 ` paul.szabo
2013-01-31 23:06 ` paul.szabo
2013-02-01 1:07 ` Ben Hutchings
2013-02-01 2:12 ` paul.szabo
2013-02-01 2:12 ` paul.szabo
2013-02-01 2:57 ` Ben Hutchings
2013-02-01 3:13 ` paul.szabo
2013-02-01 3:13 ` paul.szabo
2013-02-01 4:38 ` Phil Turmel
2013-02-01 4:38 ` Phil Turmel
2013-02-01 10:20 ` Pavel Machek
2013-02-01 10:20 ` Pavel Machek
2013-02-01 10:25 ` PAE problems was " Pavel Machek
2013-02-01 10:25 ` Pavel Machek
2013-02-01 16:57 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2013-02-01 16:57 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-02-01 17:45 ` Ben Hutchings
2013-02-07 0:28 ` Dave Hansen
2013-02-07 0:28 ` Dave Hansen
2013-02-10 19:09 ` Pavel Machek
2013-02-10 19:09 ` Pavel Machek
2013-02-17 9:10 ` Simon Jeons
2013-02-17 9:10 ` Simon Jeons
2013-02-24 22:10 ` paul.szabo
2013-02-24 22:10 ` paul.szabo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=510BF3F1.2050605@zytor.com \
--to=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=ben@decadent.org.uk \
--cc=dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=paul.szabo@sydney.edu.au \
--cc=pavel@denx.de \
--cc=philip@turmel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.