[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#682007: [squeeze-backports] NULL pointer dereference in __fscache_read_or_alloc_pages



Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> 2012-07-20 11:25:
merge 682116 682007
quit

Hi,

Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> 2012-07-19 13:32:
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 13:37 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:

We don't support proprietary stuff. Please remove and try again.

To be clear, Bastian is referring to the proprietary kernel module
(nvidia).

I think this stance is too aggressive.  Testing without the modules we
do not support can certainly help, but in cases like this where the
proprietary module is not likely to be related, I'd rather hear about
problems earlier than have submitters wait until they have time to
reproduce without.

Luckily this has been reproduced without the nvidia module, so
merging.

Rhaoul writes:

	This is reproducable using "grep -r abc *" inside a directory with
	   9541 files (no sym- or hardlinks, no block or character special files) in
	   1524 directories
	(PHP MODX installation)

I downloaded the couple of files from that site [1] and unzipped them to hopefully create a similar test setup. I had to make two copies of it to get that many files/dirs.

Right now I'm running this to see what happens:
# for i in {1..100}; do grep -r abc /cae/apps/data/testapp-1/tmp* > /dev/null; done

So far nothing much, but I just started.
Some other points for comparison:
- does the cache need to be fresh? I have a cron job that does this from time to time (about once a month with some random splay between machines) on these machines anyways (basically stop cachefilesd && rm -rf the_cache_dir_contents && start cachefilesd)
- anything else in particular about the test I should look for?


I've also noticed that I can usually get cachefilesd to spin to 100% cpu if I do something like this:

# grep pattern /home/logs/some_multi_gb_large_readonly_logfile

I recall seeing patches for large file support, but wasn't sure on their status. Anyways, that's digressing, so I'll leave that as a separate item for later.

Thanks,
Brian

[1] http://modx.com/download/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: