On 30.11.2006 [12:43:09 +1100], David Gibson wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 09:56:51PM -0800, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> [snip]
> > > I don't really see that failing after the first child comes back with
> > > a signal is a problem. I don't see any situations where the return
> > > code from t
On 14.11.2006 [14:50:18 +1100], David Gibson wrote:
> Current kernels have a bug in the brk() codepath. This path, unlike
> the mmap() path, doesn't check if the newly allocated region
> intersects a hugepage dedicated region. This means it can create a
> normalpage VMA which extends into a hugep
On 30.11.2006 [11:54:36 +1100], David Gibson wrote:
> This went to the list before, but it was a reply on a different
> thread, so probably got missed. Please apply.
Ack, sorry for dropping the ball. I also have your brk
> This patch adds some extra details to comments in a number of
> testcases
On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 09:56:51PM -0800, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
[snip]
> > I don't really see that failing after the first child comes back with
> > a signal is a problem. I don't see any situations where the return
> > code from the second child will be vital for debugging.
>
> Ok, I can ch
This went to the list before, but it was a reply on a different
thread, so probably got missed. Please apply.
This patch adds some extra details to comments in a number of
testcases, giving useful information about the rationale and origins
of the test. In particular it adds a prominent warning
