> Bob McElrath wrote:
> > On Wed, 28 Apr 1999, David Miller wrote:
> > > It's 48 days old, and sorry, we're just a bunch of "punk kids" who
> > > think they're going to change the world :-)
> >
> > Conveniently, my alpha hit 48 days uptime a day after you guys found this.
> > Unfortunately, it seems the problem is more complicated than just the TCP
> > code. I suspect that in many places in the kernel, time (in ms) is taken as
> > a 32-bit integer. I experienced the following symptoms (kernel 2.2.2-ac7)
> > when I hit 48 days:
> >
> > 1) No network connections succeeded.
> > 2) processes that I "visited" (i.e. went to xterm, typed something...)
> > spammed the CPU. Load hit 10 very quickly, and it took about 10 minutes for
> > 'shutdown -r now' to succeed.
> >
> > I'll install 2.2.7 with your patch today, but in 48 days I'll be out of the
> > country and away from my computer. I hope someone else can investigate this
> > further sometime around the middle of June. ;)
> >
> > Maybe some greps of the source tree for time calls?
>
> Which Is this known to be a 2.2 issue? I'm running 2.0.35 on an old
> multi which has an uptime of 91 days. Only glich is netstat spewing
> unaligned traps every now and again, but other than that, running
> great. The machine is a user/mail/web/ftp server so it gets a fair
> amount of network traffic.
If you have an uptime of 91 days, and network stuff still works, I suppose
that's conclusive evidince that it's in 2.2 only. Examine the patch to be
sure though...
-- Bob
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin
Bob McElrath (rsmcelrath@students.wisc.edu) Univ. of Wisconsin at Madison
-
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/