From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Whitcroft Subject: Re: 2.6.26-rc5-mm3: BUG large value for HugePages_Rsvd Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 18:16:44 +0100 Message-ID: <20080619171644.GC13275@shadowen.org> References: <20080611225945.4da7bb7f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <485A8903.9030808@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <485A8903.9030808-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org> Sender: kernel-testers-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Jon Tollefson Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, kernel-testers-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, Nick Piggin , Nishanth Aravamudan , Adam Litke On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 11:27:47AM -0500, Jon Tollefson wrote: > After running some of the libhugetlbfs tests the value for > /proc/meminfo/HugePages_Rsvd becomes really large. It looks like it has > wrapped backwards from zero. > Below is the sequence I used to run one of the tests that causes this; > the tests passes for what it is intended to test but leaves a large > value for reserved pages and that seemed strange to me. > test run on ppc64 with 16M huge pages Yes Adam reported that here yesterday, he found it in his hugetlfs testing. I have done some investigation on it and it is being triggered by a bug in the private reservation tracking patches. It is triggered by the hugetlb test which causes some complex vma splits to occur on a private mapping. I believe I have the underlying problem nailed and do have some nearly complete patches for this and they should be in a postable state by tommorrow. -apw -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-testers" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html