From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Helge Deller Subject: Re: vfork test case. Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 20:12:42 +0100 Message-ID: <4B2A82AA.10907@gmx.de> References: <20091216213505.DE6EE537C@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Cc: carlos@systemhalted.org, dave.anglin@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, kyle@mcmartin.ca, James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com To: John David Anglin Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20091216213505.DE6EE537C@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> List-ID: List-Id: linux-parisc.vger.kernel.org On 12/16/2009 10:35 PM, John David Anglin wrote: >> On 12/15/2009 11:21 PM, John David Anglin wrote: >>>> I have constructed a vfork test case which shows some of the problems >>>> I have using vfork reliably. This fails every time on my PA8700 system >>>> running 2.6.32-rc6. It appears as though r28 (ret0) in the parent is >>>> being corrupted. >>> >>> The test doesn't fail on two of my builds: >>> Linux mx3210 2.6.31.7 #5 Wed Dec 9 22:49:53 EST 2009 parisc64 >>> Linux hiauly6 2.6.31.7 #18 Wed Dec 9 21:34:36 EST 2009 parisc >> >> I did tested your testcase on my c3000 too but it didn't failed for me either. >> This was on some 2.6.32-rc candidate. > > I think it must be because Carlos is building SMP kernels. I couldn't reproduce on my SMP box either (but it's PA8500 instead of PA8700): cpu : PA8500 (PCX-W) model : 9000/785/J5000 Linux ls3017 2.6.32-32bit #79 SMP Thu Dec 3 14:04:53 CET 2009 parisc GNU/Linux Helge