[CentOS] Re: [Ntop-misc] PF_RING crashed the CentOS5 - BUG: soft lockup - CPU#7
on 7-30-2008 9:54 PM Ian jonhson spake the following: It seems that you tried to patch the CentOS kernel and it didn't work. I am doing this experiment. And, I don't know what would happen. Different from previous work, I don't patch the kernel from www.kernel.org but patch the one download from www.centos.org. I would use the same version (kernel-2.6.18) to do patching in CentOS5. From the view of Scott and Johnny, I think this is proper way to accomplish my work. Thanks. Ian That should be safer, but your best bet would be to add the patch to the bottom of the patch section of the spec file so you don't exclude the multitude of other patches there. Then cross your fingers and see if it builds clean. -- MailScanner is like deodorant... You hope everybody uses it, and you notice quickly if they don't signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Re: [Ntop-misc] PF_RING crashed the CentOS5 - BUG: soft lockup - CPU#7
> It seems that you tried to patch the CentOS kernel and it didn't work. I am doing this experiment. And, I don't know what would happen. Different from previous work, I don't patch the kernel from www.kernel.org but patch the one download from www.centos.org. I would use the same version (kernel-2.6.18) to do patching in CentOS5. >From the view of Scott and Johnny, I think this is proper way to accomplish my work. Thanks. Ian ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Re: [Ntop-misc] PF_RING crashed the CentOS5 - BUG: soft lockup - CPU#7
Johnny Hughes wrote: Scott Silva wrote: It seems that you tried to patch the CentOS kernel and it didn't work. A patch for a newer kernel probably wouldn't apply clean, and the CentOS kernels coming from RHEL are heavily patched already. The last time I played in the kernel there were at least a hundred patches. Probably more. Any one of those could contribute to your new patch failing. I usually wouldn't recommend using a non-standard kernel on CentOS. If the kernel in the main repo or the plus repo doesn't suit your system, and you add a kernel from the main kernel.org sources, you risk de-stabilizing your system. An Enterprise linux like CentOS is designed for stability and long life and the pieces are fairly intertwined. If you need a custom patch or a newer kernel, I would just use a distribution like Gentoo or Slackware that seems to use newer parts, or see if someone already adds your patch to their current kernel. For the record ... the number of patches in the latest RHEL-5 kernel == 1529 sorry ... centos-4 == 1529 patches centos-5 == 1819 patches signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Re: [Ntop-misc] PF_RING crashed the CentOS5 - BUG: soft lockup - CPU#7
Scott Silva wrote: It seems that you tried to patch the CentOS kernel and it didn't work. A patch for a newer kernel probably wouldn't apply clean, and the CentOS kernels coming from RHEL are heavily patched already. The last time I played in the kernel there were at least a hundred patches. Probably more. Any one of those could contribute to your new patch failing. I usually wouldn't recommend using a non-standard kernel on CentOS. If the kernel in the main repo or the plus repo doesn't suit your system, and you add a kernel from the main kernel.org sources, you risk de-stabilizing your system. An Enterprise linux like CentOS is designed for stability and long life and the pieces are fairly intertwined. If you need a custom patch or a newer kernel, I would just use a distribution like Gentoo or Slackware that seems to use newer parts, or see if someone already adds your patch to their current kernel. For the record ... the number of patches in the latest RHEL-5 kernel == 1529 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Re: [Ntop-misc] PF_RING crashed the CentOS5 - BUG: soft lockup - CPU#7
on 7-29-2008 11:10 PM Ian jonhson spake the following: If you need a newer kernel to use that patch, I would recommend something that runs more cutting edge for that server, maybe Gentoo or Fedora 9. I don't recommend patching CentOS with a new kernel as you lose the main benefit for using an Enterprise distro .. stability. You meant I should not patch the newest kernel but original kernel, right? For example, I should download the source codes of kernel -2.6.18 used in CentOS 5 from www.centos.org and do patching. right? I am thinking the same method to achieve the highest stability. If you also recommend the way, I am willing to try again. Thanks! Ian It seems that you tried to patch the CentOS kernel and it didn't work. A patch for a newer kernel probably wouldn't apply clean, and the CentOS kernels coming from RHEL are heavily patched already. The last time I played in the kernel there were at least a hundred patches. Probably more. Any one of those could contribute to your new patch failing. I usually wouldn't recommend using a non-standard kernel on CentOS. If the kernel in the main repo or the plus repo doesn't suit your system, and you add a kernel from the main kernel.org sources, you risk de-stabilizing your system. An Enterprise linux like CentOS is designed for stability and long life and the pieces are fairly intertwined. If you need a custom patch or a newer kernel, I would just use a distribution like Gentoo or Slackware that seems to use newer parts, or see if someone already adds your patch to their current kernel. -- MailScanner is like deodorant... You hope everybody uses it, and you notice quickly if they don't signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Re: [Ntop-misc] PF_RING crashed the CentOS5 - BUG: soft lockup - CPU#7
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 1:10 AM, Ian jonhson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> If you need a newer kernel to use that patch, I would recommend something >> that runs more cutting edge for that server, maybe Gentoo or Fedora 9. I >> don't recommend patching CentOS with a new kernel as you lose the main >> benefit for using an Enterprise distro .. stability. > > You meant I should not patch the newest kernel but original kernel, right? > For example, I should download the source codes of kernel -2.6.18 used > in CentOS 5 from www.centos.org and do patching. right? > > I am thinking the same method to achieve the highest stability. If you > also recommend the way, I am willing to try again. I think Scott is suggesting that you consider using a different distro. Wait until he gets into work and he can verify whether or not that is what he is suggesting you do. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] Re: [Ntop-misc] PF_RING crashed the CentOS5 - BUG: soft lockup - CPU#7
> If you need a newer kernel to use that patch, I would recommend something > that runs more cutting edge for that server, maybe Gentoo or Fedora 9. I > don't recommend patching CentOS with a new kernel as you lose the main > benefit for using an Enterprise distro .. stability. You meant I should not patch the newest kernel but original kernel, right? For example, I should download the source codes of kernel -2.6.18 used in CentOS 5 from www.centos.org and do patching. right? I am thinking the same method to achieve the highest stability. If you also recommend the way, I am willing to try again. Thanks! Ian ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Re: [Ntop-misc] PF_RING crashed the CentOS5 - BUG: soft lockup - CPU#7
on 7-29-2008 9:48 AM Ian jonhson spake the following: On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 3:25 PM, Luca Deri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Ian from the trace below I don't see an error related to PF_RING but a soft-lockup (see below). I have tested PF_RING on 2.6.24 and .26 and have not experienced the problem you reported. hmm... I have restarted the operating system with CentOS's original kernel and done again my experiments. I found that bug has not occurred again. I don't know why. Maybe, the traditional libpcap has no provided enough capability like PF_RING. Or, perhapse something wrong is indeed in patched kernel or Dell hardware drivers. BTW, could you tell me what OS distribution you used in your testing PF_RING, RedHat AS4 or Others? And what kernel source codes are downloaded, from vendor's websites or www.kernel.org? I very thank you if you can recommend what OS distribution and what kernel version are put together can achieve the maximal stability. Thank anybody! Ian If you need a newer kernel to use that patch, I would recommend something that runs more cutting edge for that server, maybe Gentoo or Fedora 9. I don't recommend patching CentOS with a new kernel as you lose the main benefit for using an Enterprise distro .. stability. I love CentOS, but no one distribution can be everything for everyone. That is why there are so many choices. -- MailScanner is like deodorant... You hope everybody uses it, and you notice quickly if they don't signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] Re: [Ntop-misc] PF_RING crashed the CentOS5 - BUG: soft lockup - CPU#7
On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 3:25 PM, Luca Deri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ian > from the trace below I don't see an error related to PF_RING but a > soft-lockup (see below). > > I have tested PF_RING on 2.6.24 and .26 and have not experienced the problem > you reported. hmm... I have restarted the operating system with CentOS's original kernel and done again my experiments. I found that bug has not occurred again. I don't know why. Maybe, the traditional libpcap has no provided enough capability like PF_RING. Or, perhapse something wrong is indeed in patched kernel or Dell hardware drivers. BTW, could you tell me what OS distribution you used in your testing PF_RING, RedHat AS4 or Others? And what kernel source codes are downloaded, from vendor's websites or www.kernel.org? I very thank you if you can recommend what OS distribution and what kernel version are put together can achieve the maximal stability. Thank anybody! Ian ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
