From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Message-ID: <000d01c5911b$0f049430$cd01a8c0@DESIGNLAB> From: "Bogdan Antonovici" To: "Marcelo Tosatti" References: <1121959795.800.18.camel@rd-lab> <1a928a85f53f5dcd972161356611a312@embeddededge.com> <1122047198.6726.13.camel@rd-lab> <20050722125750.GA5950@dmt.cnet> Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 08:16:24 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000A_01C590F1.26038490" Cc: linuxppc-dev , linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org, ppckernel Subject: Re: swap_dup: Bad swap file entry 00480020 List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C590F1.26038490 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Yes, it was. After some research on the previous message i realized that = it run out of memory so i did mem=3D8M and it hasn't been crashed since = then. I still would like to understand why that swap code was run when the = swapping wasn't activated at all. Thank you. Bogdan ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Marcelo Tosatti=20 To: bogdan antonovici=20 Cc: Dan Malek ; linuxppc-dev ; ppckernel ; = linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org=20 Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 7:57 AM Subject: Re: swap_dup: Bad swap file entry 00480020 On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 10:46:38AM -0500, bogdan antonovici wrote: > Hi Dan, >=20 > I checked the driver code. I found a pointer that was in my opinion > initialized too late and i corrected that but other than that i = haven't > found anything. > I ran the driver alone, enabling the interrupts and the interrupt > routine doesn't cause any trouble. > I started my application and i haven't seen any sign of trouble. > But once i started also the snmpd after few interrupts i got the > message: >=20 > __alloc_pages: 0-order allocation failed (gfp=3D0x1d2/0) > VM: killing process sectionmond Thats a different problem: you ran out of memory and the VM can't swap out any data. So its likely that the pagetable corruption is gone (it was indeed a = bug in the driver as Dan suspected). > sectionmond being my application. > My read and write driver operation are requesting a page for a = buffer > but they also release it. Should i declare the buffer pointer with > volatile attribute? > Do you know what may cause that message? Out of memory condition. ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C590F1.26038490 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Yes, it was. After some research on the = previous=20 message i realized that it run out of memory so i did mem=3D8M and it = hasn't been=20 crashed since then.
I still would like to understand why = that swap code=20 was run when the swapping wasn't activated at all.
Thank you.
Bogdan
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Marcelo Tosatti =
Cc: Dan Malek ; linuxppc-dev ; ppckernel ; linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org= =20
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 = 7:57 AM
Subject: Re: swap_dup: Bad swap = file=20 entry 00480020

On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 10:46:38AM -0500, bogdan = antonovici=20 wrote:
> Hi Dan,
>
> I checked the driver code. I = found a=20 pointer that was in my opinion
> initialized too late and i = corrected=20 that but other than that i haven't
> found anything.
> I = ran the=20 driver alone, enabling the interrupts and the interrupt
> = routine=20 doesn't cause any trouble.
> I started my application and i = haven't seen=20 any sign of trouble.
> But once i started also the snmpd after = few=20 interrupts i got the
> message:
>
> __alloc_pages: = 0-order=20 allocation failed (gfp=3D0x1d2/0)
> VM: killing process=20 sectionmond

Thats a different problem: you ran out of memory = and the VM=20 can't swap
out any data.

So its likely that the pagetable = corruption=20 is gone (it was indeed a bug
in the driver as Dan = suspected).

>=20 sectionmond being my application.
> My read and write driver = operation=20 are requesting a page for a buffer
> but they also release it. = Should i=20 declare the buffer pointer with
> volatile attribute?
> Do = you=20 know what may cause that message?

Out of memory=20 condition. ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C590F1.26038490--