Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Problem with 2.4.0-test9-pre6 seems to be SHM | Date | Sun, 24 Sep 2000 12:59:31 -1100 | From | Daniel Stone <> |
| |
> safemode wrote: > > > Mark Hahn wrote: > > > >> this has nothing to do with the linux kernel. > >> X itself does not use shm for anything. apps may use > >> an X extension (XSHM) which uses shm segments to exchange > >> image data without copying through a socket, but that's > >> an extension, not inherent to X. > >> > >> > Ok, compiling using a cvs of X i got a couple hours ago, I'm just > >> > >> > wondering what the average segment number is for SHM on an X > >> session > >> > that has been up for a while .... i'll get back with any sort of > >> info > >> > on if the SHM problem has been solved with this latest CVS or if > >> it > >> > continues to look like a kernel SHM problem. So far though, > >> > 2.4.0-test8-vm3 is handling the problem Quite well as opposed to > >> test9, > >> > which died in 2 hours upon booting ...and it didn't have the added > >> > >> > stress of compiling X. > >> > > >> > - > >> > > > > > > I think it has a lot to do with the kernel, and with X. Since i > > havn't upgraded anything but X (and thus the extensions) ... now it's > > obvious that X is at fault for providing us with a wonderful shared > > memory leak. But, the kernel too, has something to do with it since > > test9 seems to be fairly unstable with it, causing all sorts of weird > > happenings before totally freezing up like test8-vm3 does. This > > problems only manifests in VERY recent X cvs copies so most people > > will not see this problem. The problem i'm wondering about is if the > > Kernel is handling shared memory correctly or if this is entirely X's > > fault. > > > > Somehow i cant help but think this is somehow linked to an OOM problem > that has yet to be fixed with the 2.4.0-testX series. It seems > suspiciously like the kernel is killing init when X decides it would be > peachy to gobble up all the ram. i dont know of any way to prove > this though.
The problem is most definitely NOT X as I experienced the exact same problems and reported it to l-k yesterday; and my box has no trace of X on it. gcc and grep take it down though.
d
-- Daniel Stone Kernel Hacker (or at least has aspirations to be) daniel@dustpuppy.ods.org http://dustpuppy.ods.org - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |