Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 11:19:43 -0500 (CDT) From: Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com> To: Scott Long <scottl@freebsd.org> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Release Engineering Status Report Message-ID: <20030916111410.F12166@odysseus.silby.com> In-Reply-To: <3F6735B7.9050109@freebsd.org> References: <3F66A446.7090408@freebsd.org> <20030916131622.N54869@news1.macomnet.ru> <3F672308.1080909@freebsd.org> <3F673285.8080903@potentialtech.com> <3F6735B7.9050109@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 16 Sep 2003, Scott Long wrote: > Patches have been floated on the mailing list that revert PAE in its > various stages. Maybe those need to be brought back up. Silby? Tor? > > Scott I believe that Tor's commit on August 30th resolved the PAE-related problems, so there is no need for a reversion. Since that time, I've seen three panics posted: 1. Some netinet/ related panic which I couldn't make heads or tails of, and I haven't any followup reports from the poster. 2. Maxim's buildworld -j64 memory kmap entry exhaustion panic, which can be fixed by increasing the number of kmap entries. (Tor has a patch for this, I will probably commit it soon.) 3. A panic caused by sending 64K-1 ping packets, which I can't reproduce. (There's also a small problem with if_xl on pentium-1 machines, but since it's my fault and I'm waiting on test results from a guy, we won't talk about it.) (Hey, anyone have a pentium-200 and a 3com 905B card? Contact me, further testing can't hurt.) So, as far as I can tell, there are no remaining problems related to PAE; I believe that most people are venting frustration that built up between August 9th and 30th. Mike "Silby" Silbersack
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030916111410.F12166>