From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx193.postini.com [74.125.245.193]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 75D116B0007 for ; Wed, 30 Jan 2013 14:48:45 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 06:40:14 +1100 From: paul.szabo@sydney.edu.au Message-Id: <201301301940.r0UJeEKa016044@como.maths.usyd.edu.au> Subject: Re: [RFC] Reproducible OOM with just a few sleeps In-Reply-To: <51093D03.8070006@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com, pavel@ucw.cz Cc: 695182@bugs.debian.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Dear Pavel and Dave, > The assertion was that 4GB with no PAE passed a forkbomb test (ooming) > while 4GB of RAM with PAE hung, thus _PAE_ is broken. Yes, PAE is broken. Still, maybe the above needs slight correction: non-PAE HIGHMEM4G passed the "sleep test": no OOM, nothing unexpected; whereas PAE OOMed then hung (tested with various RAM from 3GB to 64GB). The feeling I get is that amd64 is proposed as a drop-in replacement for PAE, that support and development of PAE is gone, that PAE is dead. Cheers, Paul Paul Szabo psz@maths.usyd.edu.au http://www.maths.usyd.edu.au/u/psz/ School of Mathematics and Statistics University of Sydney Australia -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org