On Tuesday 27 October 2009, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > Oops. no, please no. > 8aa7e847 is regression fixing commit. this revert indicate the > regression occur again. > if we really need to revert it, we need to revert 1faa16d2287 too. > however, I doubt this commit really cause regression to iwlan. IOW, > I agree Jens. This is not intended as a patch for mainline, but just as a test to see if it improves things. It may be a regression fix, but it also creates a significant change in behavior during swapping in my test case. If a fix is needed, it will probably by different from this revert. Please read: http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/10/26/510. This mail has some data: http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/10/26/455. > I hope to try reproduce this problem on my test environment. Can anyone > please explain reproduce way? Please see my mails in this thread for bug #14141: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/896714 You will probably need to read some of them to understand the context of the two mails linked above. The most relevant ones are (all from the same thread; not sure why gmane gives such weird links): http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.mm/39909 http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.kernel-testers/7228 http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.kernel-testers/7165 > Is special hardware necessary? Not special hardware, but you may need an encrypted partition and NFS; the test may need to be modified according to the amount of memory you have. I think it should be possible to reproduce the freezes I see while ignoring the SKB allocation errors as IMO those are just a symptom, not the cause. So you should not need wireless. The severity of the freezes during my test often increases if the test is repeated (without rebooting). Cheers, FJP -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-testers" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
