Impression of 2.2.14 vs. 2.2.15-pre

[Steve VanDevender]

Paul writes:
 > 	One other thing 2.2.15pre did was completely expose my bad memory:)
 > Under 2.2.14, I had one suspicious compiler segfault in weeks up uptime
 > and lots and lots of building. Right away on 2.2.15pre, I had a tarball
 > untar with a character off by a bit, corrupt gcc tmp files, etc. I did
 > some testing on my mem, and it is definitely flakey.... because of
 > this, my testing was of limited duration...

I wish I could blame the problems in 2.2.15pre4 on bad memory, but I
think it's pretty unlikely that my memory went bad at the same time I
booted into it, and I haven't seen mysterious segfaults on this system
for years.  (It once had L2 cache a little too slow for the CPU, so I do
know what bad memory errors look like; since then the cache ram has been
upgraded to faster chips.)

I'm still pretty sure that the VM changes in 2.2.15pre4 have some kind
of problem.  I'm back at 2.2.15pre3 and my system has been up for longer
than it took to lock up under 2.2.14pre4.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo en vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/