Hi,
anonym wrote (23 Dec 2011 15:41:09 GMT) :
> For tests 2 and 3 (release_process/test/erase_memory_on_shutdown)
> I rebooted to a 64-bit lenny (so CONFIG_STRICT_DEVMEM is disabled),
> and got hundreds of millions of hits in *both* tests :( (although
> test 3 had distinctively less hits than test 2). Not good.
Indeed.
> I made a short script which printed the number of hits per 10MB
> memory segment [1], and 0-10 had 64511 hits, 10-800 had 0, but 800+
> were either completely full of hits, or at least had >0 hits.
> I didn't look at the memory consumption of Tails before I rebooted
> to do test 3, so I'm unsure of how much of the 10-800 blocks that
> were cleared and how much was allocated and hence not touchable by
> fillram, but I doubt all of it were allocated (a freshly booted
> Tails doesn't use *that* much, right?).
Since 800*10=8000MB and the test box had only 4GB, I assume your
numbers (0-10, 10-800, 800+) are expressed in MB and not in
blocks, correct?
> It seems something is amiss, so I'm not sure this should be merged
> before we know what's going on
Sure. I also think this should not refrain yourself to go on with the
release process. I'll send another email about it in the appropriate
thread to try to get us organized, unless someone else is faster than
me (hint, hint).
> (could be that something went wrong in my test, and I can't try
> again because now I won't have access to that computer for a day or
> so).
I'll try to run the same tests today.
Cheers,
--
intrigeri <intrigeri@???>
| GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc
| OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc
| Did you exchange a walk on part in the war
| for a lead role in the cage?
