lubuntu-qa team mailing list archive

[Phill Whiteside <PhillW@xxxxxxxxxx>]

My apologies,

setting up twin VM's whilst on a 3G device has taken far longer than I
thought it would. The two VM's are updating, but I need some sleep. I'll
get onto the case after some sleep.

Regards,

Phill.
P.S, I'm at the weekend house which does not have broadband :)

On 4 January 2013 22:39, Phill Whiteside <PhillW@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi Chad,
>
> the launchpad page that I opened [1] does not exhibit this behaviour, I
> will install a new VM and try to get a set of dmesg for you. Just to keep
> things fair, I'll also create an identical VM but open the same tabs with
> FireFox. I should have a result by the morning (it is 22:40 here and it
> takes me a little while to set up VM's) :)
>
> Thank you for your input on this,
>
> Phill.
>
> 1. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/chromium-browser/+bug/1084852
>
>
> On 4 January 2013 19:54, Chad MILLER <chad.miller@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On Thu 03 Jan 2013 06:49:47 PM EST, Phill Whiteside wrote:
>> > We are seeing an issue with Chromium on low RAM systems where we get
>> "It's dead Jim" issues. At first I believed this to be a Chromium memory
>> leak, but it does not affect all web pages [1]. I have tried to report this
>> via [2] which errorred out with 'mal formed request', trying to use the
>> 'learn more' and trying to report an error in the failed window also
>> resulted in the same. Even more odd (to me) was that leaving the tabs open
>> ended up in them giving the "It's dead Jim" error on the tab. Just as a
>> check in my own logic, I opened up a launchpad bug tab for a bug. This tab,
>> over several days & resets of other tabs that had to be reset never once
>> failed.
>> >
>> > Apologies for the long introduction. Is there anything I can add to the
>> system to try and get some details for you guys to work off? gdb I have
>> been intimated at, is not really suited for a memory leak; but as I don't
>> think it is a memory leak and Chromium still runs with the tabs still
>> 'alive' would it be of use to use gdb to trace back an PiD?
>> >
>> > Assuming you don't have a machine that you can pull memory chips out
>> of, until you have 512Mb of RAM (The guys with these machines are the ones
>> who 1st reported it)..
>> >
>> > 1. Create a VM with 512 Mb RAM
>> > 2. Install Lubuntu (I suggest using alternate at such low RAM) [3] -
>> I've also tried this with Raring
>> > 3. Open a couple of tabs, e.g. BBC News [4] and a bug report [5] -
>> Well, it was a chromium bug :)
>> > 4. Open a couple of other tabs for sites you know to be stable -
>> Remember, you are on a low-RAM system, nothing too exotic!
>> > 5. Wait.
>> > 6. Tabs will report "It's dead Jim".. - This may take several hours -
>> Tab opened with [5] will stay working.
>> >
>> > Us testers are stuck to try to progress and any help you can give to
>> help log the bug correctly in order that it can be progressed is needed.
>> I've tried installing the dev chromium instead of the 'new' chromium in the
>> repos, the effect is the same.
>>
>>
>> Hi Phill, all.
>>
>> I assume it's the out-of-memory process reaper in the kernel, at work
>> here killing process that backs the tab you see.  Can you confirm
>> something interesting in "dmesg" output?
>>
>> I can imagine that a lazily-written web site can have Javascript code
>> that ever grows its memory usage.  I'm keen to know whether the same
>> machine can reproduce this crash on a mundane web site that doesn't
>> have JS events firing off RPC calls and/or updating the DOM.  If it
>> does crash anyway, this gets interesting.
>>
>> Answering those two questions would help me categorize this bug-report
>> pretty easily.  Let's open a normal bug on Launchpad to track this for
>> now.
>>
>> - chad
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/phillw
>



-- 
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/phillw