Re: [PATCH 0/5] Candidate fix for increased number of GFP_ATOMICfailures V2

[Karol Lewandowski]

On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 02:46:56PM +0100, Mel LKML wrote:
> Hi,

Hi,

> On 10/23/09, Karol Lewandowski <karol.k.lewandowski@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 06:58:10PM +0200, Karol Lewandowski wrote:

> > Ok, I've tested patches 1+2+4 and bug, while very hard to trigger, is
> > still present. I'll test complete 1-4 patchset as time permits.

Sorry for silence, I've been quite busy lately.


> And also patch 5 please which is the revert. Patch 5 as pointed out is
> probably a red herring. Hwoever, it has changed the timing and made a
> difference for some testing so I'd like to know if it helps yours as
> well.

I've tested patches 1+2+3+4 in my normal usage scenario (do some work,
suspend, do work, suspend, ...) and it failed today after 4 days (== 4
suspend-resume cycles).

I'll test 1-5 now.


Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/