Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 12:33:17 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> Cc: alc@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, Eric Anderson <anderson@centtech.com> Subject: Re: Reboot while booting with new per-CPU allocator Message-ID: <20050617193317.GA15570@dragon.NUXI.org> In-Reply-To: <20050617123954.W56734@fledge.watson.org> References: <42B18536.3080200@videotron.ca> <20050616151502.X27625@fledge.watson.org> <42B192D2.7000505@videotron.ca> <20050616181820.E27625@fledge.watson.org> <42B1B784.8010405@videotron.ca> <20050616184127.L27625@fledge.watson.org> <20050617110902.C56734@fledge.watson.org> <42B2B4C0.1030504@centtech.com> <20050617123954.W56734@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 12:40:50PM +0100, Robert Watson wrote: > On Fri, 17 Jun 2005, Eric Anderson wrote: > >>Interestingly, there's been a bunch of reports of this in the past few > >>days, and there weren't immediately after the malloc commit. I wonder if > >>some other recent change has increased the amount of UMA memory allocated > >>early in the boot, increasing the level of reports... > > > > Increase UMA_BOOT_PAGES to prevent a crash during initialization. See > > http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?42AD8270.8060906 for a detailed > > description of the crash. > > Yeah, this is the fix, but I guess I'm wondering what caused a recent > spate of problem reports -- was it a delayed response to the malloc change > as people gradually upgraded, or some other recent kernel change that > caused increase demand for memory. The sys/dev/atkbdc commit is what pushed me over the limit, not the malloc changes. I am loading 15 modules. -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050617193317.GA15570>