From owner-freebsd-hackers  Fri Nov  1 13:39:12 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id NAA22177
          for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 1 Nov 1996 13:39:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ocean.campus.luth.se (ocean.campus.luth.se [130.240.194.116])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA22134
          for <freebsd-hackers@freefall.freebsd.org>; Fri, 1 Nov 1996 13:39:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from karpen@localhost) by ocean.campus.luth.se (8.7.5/8.7.3) id WAA09413; Fri, 1 Nov 1996 22:49:05 +0100 (MET)
From: Mikael Karpberg <karpen@ocean.campus.luth.se>
Message-Id: <199611012149.WAA09413@ocean.campus.luth.se>
Subject: Re: Another data point in the daily panics...
To: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au (Michael Smith)
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 1996 22:49:05 +0100 (MET)
Cc: freebsd-hackers@freefall.freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <199611011413.AAA05539@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> from Michael Smith at "Nov 2, 96 00:43:49 am"
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL22 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

According to Michael Smith:
> Mikael Karpberg stands accused of saying:
[...]
> > Then again, I know a friends 2.1.5 machine rebooted after running 30
> > seconds of "crashme". 
> 
> Sounds inconsistent with -stable as I know it.  I'd be worrying about
> hardware before pointing the finger at FreeBSD.

Nothing wrong with his hardware, as far as we know...

> > Firing up _40_ at boot time, just for kicks,
> > must mean he can get a lot more out of Linux's vm/fs system then we can
> > get out of FreeBSD's, when it comes to stablilty. If you want to stress
> 
> Is this a troll or something?  Or are you genuinely naiive?  For all
> Terry's (valid) complaints, the FreeBSD vm/fs system brooks no
> comparison of that order.

Very possibly I'm just naiive ;-)  The thing is I'm not running -current,
(even if I read both -hackers, -current, and cvs-all) and I'm not very well
informed with how Linux progresses. I just thought I'd ask... 2.1.5-RELEASE
didn't stand the test on his P75, at least. No idea how 2.2 nehaves, but
I intend to see if I can get -current up and running on one of my machines
this weekend, at least. It's running 2.1.0 right now :(  Been too lazy to
upgrade it, since I haven't used it for much more then xterminal...

> > Anyone tried to fire up 40 crashmes and wait? Should produce nice output
> > for debugging a stressed system, no?
> 
> Care to send me a copy of the aforementioned 'crashme', and I'll bore
> you with the results.  I can even swap in some marginal memory and
> repeat the process to see if I can reproduce your friend's
> observations 8)

Joe Greco already tried it, as we can see. So.... we have the results.
Seems to work very well, no? That's great. :-)

I'll be back with more stupid suggestions, when you least expect it! :-) :-)

  /Mikael