Re: [PATCH 0/8] Volatile Ranges (v8?)

[Dhaval Giani <dgiani@mozilla.com>]

On 2013-06-19 12:41 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> Hello Dhaval,
>
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 12:59:02PM -0400, Dhaval Giani wrote:
>> On 2013-06-18 12:11 AM, Minchan Kim wrote:
>>> Hello Dhaval,
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 12:24:07PM -0400, Dhaval Giani wrote:
>>>> Hi John,
>>>>
>>>> I have been giving your git tree a whirl, and in order to simulate a
>>>> limited memory environment, I was using memory cgroups.
>>>>
>>>> The program I was using to test is attached here. It is your test
>>>> code, with some changes (changing the syscall interface, reducing
>>>> the memory pressure to be generated).
>>>>
>>>> I trapped it in a memory cgroup with 1MB memory.limit_in_bytes and hit this,
>>>>
>>>> [  406.207612] ------------[ cut here ]------------
>>>> [  406.207621] kernel BUG at mm/vrange.c:523!
>>>> [  406.207626] invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP
>>>> [  406.207631] Modules linked in:
>>>> [  406.207637] CPU: 0 PID: 1579 Comm: volatile-test Not tainted
>>> Thanks for the testing!
>>> Does below patch fix your problem?
>> Yes it does! Thank you very much for the patch.
> Thaks for the confirming.
> While I tested it, I found several problems so I just sent fixes as reply
> of each [7/8] and [8/8].
> Could you test it?

Great! These patches (seem to) fix another issue I noticed yesterday 
with signal handling. I have pushed out my code for testing this stuff 
at https://github.com/volatile-ranges-test/vranges-test . The code and 
the scripts are still unpolished (as in you don't get a pass or fail) 
but they seem to work just fine.

>
> FYI: John, Dhaval
>
> I am working to clean purging mess up so maybe it would need not a few
> change for purging part.

Great, I will also take a look at the code.

Dhaval

--
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>