lubuntu-qa team mailing list archive

[Lars Noodén <lars.nooden@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 01/05/2013 12:39 AM, Phill Whiteside 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

There's a related bug about pages being reported "it's dead"

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/chromium-browser/+bug/1096603

And there's also a related bug about not being easily able to reload the
tabs:

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/chromium-browser/+bug/1074452

Regards,
/Lars

> 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
>>
>>
> 
>