From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261830AbUEPVaV (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 May 2004 17:30:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263645AbUEPVaU (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 May 2004 17:30:20 -0400 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:62903 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261830AbUEPV3y (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 May 2004 17:29:54 -0400 Date: Sun, 16 May 2004 14:29:16 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Steven Cole Cc: andrea@suse.de, torvalds@osdl.org, adi@bitmover.com, scole@lanl.gov, support@bitmover.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 1352 NUL bytes at the end of a page? (was Re: Assertion `s && s->tree' failed: The saga continues.) Message-Id: <20040516142916.7d07c9f3.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <200405161519.03834.elenstev@mesatop.com> References: <200405132232.01484.elenstev@mesatop.com> <200405160928.22021.elenstev@mesatop.com> <20040516203818.GY3044@dualathlon.random> <200405161519.03834.elenstev@mesatop.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.7 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Steven Cole wrote: > > Anyway, although the regression for my particular machine for this > particular load may be interesting, the good news is that I've seen > none of the failures which started this whole thread, which are relatively > easily reproduceable with PREEMPT set. So... would it be correct to say that with CONFIG_PREEMPT, ppp or its underlying driver stack a) screws up the connection and hangs and b) scribbles on pagecache? Because if so, the same will probably happen on SMP.