From: Chris Petersen <Chris.Petersen@synopsys.com>
To: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
Cc: Chris Petersen <Chris.Petersen@synopsys.COM>,
Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com>,
William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>,
Linux-Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: FIXED (was Re: PROBLEM: Blk Dev Cache causing kswapd thrashing)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 14:01:45 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3FD76D99.1960A104@synopsys.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20031210180849.GA13303@redhat.com
Dave Jones wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 12:44:42PM -0500, Chris Petersen wrote:
> >
> > To confuse matters RedHat has released an RPM with 2.4.20-24.7 which
> > apparently contains later patches that include the fix.
>
> 2.4.20-24.7 contains two patches. Both security issues. (do_brk
> and an nptl local DoS), nothing else (vs previous 2.4.20-20.7)
I wasn't claiming that it wasn't fixed UNTIL 2.4.20-24.7 specifically.
I was merely stating that 2.4.20-24.7 appears to contain the fix.
After some research it looks like the fix is sortof there in
RedHat's 2.4.20-13.7. It behaves better, but not as good as 2.4.23
or 2.4.20-24.7. By "better" I mean kswapd (and bdflush, kupdated,
kreclaimd) doesn't hog the CPU(s) as much; but it still does to
a greater extent compared to what I'm calling the "fixed" versions.
So in 2.4.20-13.7 it's quasi-busted or quasi-fixed, depending on
your half-full/empty position.
> > This can be
> > confusing because their 2.4.21-4EL kernel is busted (WRT this bug)
>
> That kernel bears no relation whatsoever to 2.4.20-24.7
> It's for a completely different product for one thing, with
> very little in common between them (in terms of patches we add).
Exactly my point!
I suppose I am working from the assumption that if vanilla
(kernel.org) 2.4.20 was fixed then 2.4.21-4EL would also be fixed
(which it's not). It would seem to me that a kernel's got no
business calling itself 2.4.21-<anything> if it's not based off of
previous kernel base. Otherwise, "21" has absolutely no meaning.
Imperical evidence seems to indicate that vanilla 2.4.20 does not
contain the fix. Whereas something that RedHat calls 2.4.20-XYZ does.
-chris
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Chris M. Petersen cmp@synopsys.com
Sr. R&D Engineer
Synopsys, Inc. o: 919.425.7342
1101 Slater Road, Suite 300 c: 919.349.6393
Durham, NC 27703 f: 919.425.7320
-----------------------------------------------------------------
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-12-10 19:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.44.0311271649520.21568-100000@logos.cnet>
2003-12-10 17:44 ` FIXED (was Re: PROBLEM: Blk Dev Cache causing kswapd thrashing) Chris Petersen
2003-12-10 18:08 ` Dave Jones
2003-12-10 19:01 ` Chris Petersen [this message]
2003-12-10 19:16 ` Dave Jones
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=3FD76D99.1960A104@synopsys.com \
--to=chris.petersen@synopsys.com \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com \
--cc=wli@holomorphy.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox