Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 11 Dec 1999 22:49:34 +0000 (GMT) | From | Dave Gilbert <> | Subject | Re: 2.3.31 - shm broken on Alpha ? |
| |
On Sat, 11 Dec 1999, Manfred wrote:
> That's OK, the new shmid number are great big hairy numbers: > the hex value is 0x2370002: it's the third (2, 0-based) shm segment, and the > sequence number is 0x46e (shmid/32768). These changes were nessecary to add > sysctl support.
Fair enough.
> There were major changes in the shm code, and I couldn't test them on a > 64-bit computer. Could you please compile and run the attached test program? > ./shmtst 8 100000 20 20 0 > or > ./shmtst 8 100000 20 20 1 [you'll see lots of messages about deleted > segments]
How long is this thing supposed to run? I left '0' running for a long time and it didn't seem to finish - had quite a few processes running fine and no complaints.
When I run the '1' varient I got among the list of processes a moan about:
started process 16111 shmctl IPC_RMID: Invalid argument started process 16112 shmctl IPC_RMID: Invalid argument shmctl IPC_RMID: Invalid argument shmctl IPC_RMID: Identifier removed
followed by a core dump. It looks like 'ptr' (return value of shmat ?) is -1
> Btw, are you running a SMP or UP kernel?
UP.
Thanks for the reply,
Dave -- -------- Have a happy GNU millennium ------------------------------ / Dr. David Alan Gilbert | Running GNU/Linux on | Happy \ \ gro.gilbert @ treblig.org | Alpha, x86, ARM and SPARC | In Hex / ____________________________|___ http://www.treblig.clara.net __/
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |