Unix Technical Forum

Re: MAX_KMAPENT doubled

This is a discussion on Re: MAX_KMAPENT doubled within the lucky.openbsd.tech forums, part of the OpenBSD category; --> There are now i386 and amd64 snapshots soon making their way to the mirrors. Watch for sets timestamped February ...


Go Back   Unix Technical Forum > Unix Operating Systems > OpenBSD > lucky.openbsd.tech

Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 02-22-2008, 11:15 AM
Peter Valchev
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: MAX_KMAPENT doubled

There are now i386 and amd64 snapshots soon making their way to the
mirrors. Watch for sets timestamped February 19, that'll be it.


> Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 19:16:26 +0100
> From: Henning Brauer <henning@openbsd.org>
> To: tech@openbsd.org
> Subject: MAX_KMAPENT doubled
> Message-ID: <20050219181626.GY13526@nudo.bsws.de>
> Mail-Followup-To: tech@openbsd.org
> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.7i
>
> ----- Forwarded message from Henning Brauer <henning@cvs.openbsd.org> -----
>
> From: Henning Brauer <henning@cvs.openbsd.org>
> To: source-changes@cvs.openbsd.org
> Subject: CVS: cvs.openbsd.org: src
> Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 10:58:03 -0700 (MST)
>
> CVSROOT: /cvs
> Module name: src
> Changes by: henning@cvs.openbsd.org 2005/02/19 10:58:03
>
> Modified files:
> sys/uvm : uvm_map.h
>
> Log message:
> double default MAX_KMAPENT to 2000, theo ok
> everybody please update your trees and test this, we need to find out
> wether there is bad side-effects from the doubling. If this does not get
> enough testing by our user community we will play safe and revert this for
> the 3.7 release, so please test.
> it needs testing on all architectures, and especially on machines that
> -now sometimes crash with the panic("uvm_mapent_alloc: out of static map entries, "
> -that have little RAM
>
> There will be snapshots up with this change soon - this is of course
> the preferred way of testing.
> Applying the diff manually is useless, especially it is absolutely
> useless to test a 3.6-stable or something like that with this diff
> applied, tehre were more changes in that area. Don't even bother, ok?
>
> this is very important, so test test test!


Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0
www.UnixAdminTalk.com