[Bug 217138] head (e.g.) -r315870 for arm64: sh vs. jemalloc asserts: include/jemalloc/internal/tsd.h:687: Failed assertion: "tsd_booted" once swapped in after being swapped out (comment 10)

bugzilla-noreply at freebsd.org bugzilla-noreply at freebsd.org
Fri Apr 7 07:56:25 UTC 2017


--- Comment #35 from Mark Millard <markmi at dsl-only.net> ---
I've found that for the "Source for allowing" attachment
I can make variations that change how much of the
allocated region prefix ends up zero vs. stays good.

I vary the sleep time between testing the initialized
allocations and doing the fork. The longer the sleep
the more zero pages show up:

# diff swap_testing[56].c                                                      
< // swap_testing5.c
> // swap_testing6.c
< // cc -g -std=c11 -Wpedantic -o swaptesting5 swap_testing5.c
> // cc -g -std=c11 -Wpedantic -o swaptesting5 swap_testing6.c
<     sleep(30); // Potentialy force swap-out here.
>     sleep(150); // Potentialy force swap-out here.
>                // For no-swap-out here cases:
>                //
>                // The longer the sleep here the more allocations
>                // that end up as zero.
>                //
>                // top's Mem Active, Inact, Wired, Bug, Free and
>                // Swap Total, Used, and Free stay unchanged.
>                // What does change is the process RES decreases
>                // while the process SIZE and SWAP stay unchanged
>                // during this sleep.

NOTE: On other architectures that I've tried (such as armv6/v7)
      RES does not decrease during the sleep --and the problem
      does not happen even for as long of sleeps as I've tried.

      (I use "stress -m 2 --vm-bytes 900M" on armv6/v7 instead
      of -m 1 --vm-bytes 1800M because that large in one
      process is not allowed.)

So watching top's RES during the sleep (longer than a few
seconds) predicts the later fails-vs.-not status: If RES
decreases (while other things associated with the process
status stay the same) then there will be a failure.

You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

More information about the freebsd-amd64 mailing list