On Sun, 2012-03-25 at 14:56 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
[...]
Any ideas? I think this safely rules out i915 as the cause.
Also, i need to retract my claim that it was running the lenny kernel
for years until just recently, now that i've inspected the logs from the
machine more
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 21:38:20 -0500, Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com wrote:
Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
I'm about to try to reboot it again to see if i can get it back to
stability under the lenny hypervisor and kernel, but i'll need to do
that with the rescue 2.6.32-5-486 image as well,
On Sat, 2012-03-24 at 00:36 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
On 03/24/2012 12:25 AM, Will Set wrote:
[...]
This is the first i'm hearing that the -486 flavor would cause
instability on highmem machines.
Can you point me to some documentation so i could understand why that
might be the
Package: linux-image-2.6.32-5-486
Version: 2.6.32-41
less than 10 minutes after booting to 2.6.32-5-486 on an HP d530 SFF
workstation (model DG784A) with 4GiB of RAM, i got this kernel BUG and
then panic:
[ 574.852044] BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at b4777dbf
[ 574.856011] IP:
Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
less than 10 minutes after booting to 2.6.32-5-486 on an HP d530 SFF
workstation (model DG784A) with 4GiB of RAM, i got this kernel BUG and
then panic:
Thanks.
[ 574.852044] BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at b4777dbf
[ 574.856011] IP: [c109520e]
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 19:19:58 -0500, Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com wrote:
Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
[ 574.852044] BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at b4777dbf
[ 574.856011] IP: [c109520e] mark_files_ro+0x27/0x6f
[ 574.856011] *pde =
[ 574.856011] Oops: 0002
Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
I'm about to try to reboot it again to see if i can get it back to
stability under the lenny hypervisor and kernel, but i'll need to do
that with the rescue 2.6.32-5-486 image as well, so it's possible that
i'll have another backtrace or crash to follow up with in a
Friday, March 23, 2012 6:42 PM Daniel Kahn Gillmor
The only kernel boot parameter on this run was console=ttyS0,115200n8 --
i brought up the rest of the system by hand during this fallback
attempt.
According to HP,
http://h18000.www1.hp.com/products/quickspecs/11632_ca/11632_ca.html ---
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 19:51:37 -0700 (PDT), Will Set debiandu...@yahoo.com
wrote:
the mobo has an 865g chipset.
Yes, i believe that's correct.
I know of 5 bug reports that confirm using boot parameter - processor.nocst=1
as a workaround for kernels 2.6.38
Thanks, i will try this the next
Will Set wrote:
I know of 5 bug reports that confirm using boot parameter - processor.nocst=1
as a workaround for kernels 2.6.38
linux-image-2.6.39 through linux-image 3.3.0-rc6-686-pae - on both of my
865g based boxes.
Link, for reference:
Friday, March 23, 2012 11:06 PMDaniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 19:51:37 -0700 (PDT), Will Set debiandu...@yahoo.com
wrote:
I know of 5 bug reports that confirm using boot parameter - processor.nocst=1
as a workaround for kernels 2.6.38
Thanks, i will try this the next time i
On 03/24/2012 12:25 AM, Will Set wrote:
Friday, March 23, 2012 11:06 PM Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 19:51:37 -0700 (PDT), Will Set debiandu...@yahoo.com
wrote:
I know of 5 bug reports that confirm using boot parameter - processor.nocst=1
as a workaround for kernels 2.6.38
12 matches
Mail list logo
