lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Dec]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:55    [W:0.059 / U:0.048 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site