Dear Oh Great Raid Masters!!

We're running RAID on two linux boxes.   Both use software RAID, and one also
has a hardware RAID (Mylex DAC960/DAC1100).  Our kernel is 2.2.11 patched with
raid0145-19990824-2.2.11.

The box that only runs software RAID has no problems at all, whereas the box
that also has hardware RAID crashes every day with "out of memory" and we have
to reboot it.  It's our department server, so it's making everyone unhappy. :(

It turns out the used memory slowly increases until all the processes are
swapped out and (we're guessing) the kernel itself runs out of memory.  Could it
be that the software RAID boot patch we applied doesn't work well with the
hardware RAID code, that it introduces a memory leak in the hardware RAID code
in the kernel?  Looking at the code this seems probable since the patch replaces
statically allocated arrays with dynamically allocated arrays (for some buffers)
in code that could well be common between the two implementations.  The software
RAID patch probably adds the correct memory management functionality to the
software RAID code, but maybe not the hardware RAID code.

I'm not a kernel hackers, so this is the best bug report I can provide.  Can you
help me;  do you have any pointers?

Best regards,
Jey



"WorldSecure Server <ogilvy.com>" made the following
 annotations on 10/27/99 10:09:11
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message.  If you are not 
the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to 
such person), you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, you 
should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply email. Please advise 
immediately if you or your employer does not consent to email for messages of this 
kind.  Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that do not relate 
to the official business of the Ogilvy Group shall be understood as neither given nor 
endorsed by it.

==============================================================================

Reply via email to