<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html style="direction: ltr;">
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<style>body p { margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-top: 0pt; } </style>
</head>
<body style="direction: ltr;" bidimailui-detected-decoding-type="UTF-8"
bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
On 05/17/2012 10:23 PM, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:20120517192336.GG12721@pear.tzafrir.org.il"
type="cite"><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I may consider upgrading to a kernel > 2.6.35 which has gone through a
long phase of "bug fixes only" but I understand there is no such around
at the moment. What I call a vintage kernel.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
You obviously have a beefy system with memory to spare. You obviously
don't really care rebooting it. The logical conclusion: build some
kernels and test it. Grab a kernel tree, see if this still crashes
v2.6.35, and if so, git bisect is your friend.
</pre>
</blockquote>
Beefy it is, yes. Which is why it hasn't reached its full memory usage
ever during the two years it has been running.<br>
<br>
Rebooting? Yes, I do care about that. Neither do I want to spend time
playing around with this. Actually, I could play around with a virtual
machine. I suppose the problem would appear likewise.<br>
<br>
I wrote to this list in case someone else wants to check his or her
computer up. It does look like this was fixed in later kernels, but it
just proves my point that no matter which kernel you pick, there's
always something. Except, maybe, those kernels that have been
maintained for a long while for stability.<br>
<br>
Eli<br>
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Web: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.billauer.co.il">http://www.billauer.co.il</a>
</pre>
</body>
</html>