Re: stable/9 panic Bad tailq NEXT(0xffffffff80e52660->tqh_last) != NULL

2012-10-03 Thread John Baldwin
On Tuesday, October 02, 2012 7:12:59 pm Sean Bruno wrote: > On Tue, 2012-10-02 at 14:06 -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > > On Tuesday, October 02, 2012 3:05:30 pm Sean Bruno wrote: > > > On Mon, 2012-10-01 at 05:47 -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > > > > Can you add extra printfs to see where exactly attach

Re: stable/9 panic Bad tailq NEXT(0xffffffff80e52660->tqh_last) != NULL

2012-10-02 Thread Sean Bruno
On Tue, 2012-10-02 at 14:06 -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > On Tuesday, October 02, 2012 3:05:30 pm Sean Bruno wrote: > > On Mon, 2012-10-01 at 05:47 -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > > > Can you add extra printfs to see where exactly attach is failing? I > > > would > > > start with the attach routine in

Re: stable/9 panic Bad tailq NEXT(0xffffffff80e52660->tqh_last) != NULL

2012-10-02 Thread John Baldwin
On Tuesday, October 02, 2012 3:05:30 pm Sean Bruno wrote: > On Mon, 2012-10-01 at 05:47 -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > > Can you add extra printfs to see where exactly attach is failing? I > > would > > start with the attach routine in sys/dev/acpica/acpi_pcib_pci.c: > > > > > > hrm ... interesti

Re: stable/9 panic Bad tailq NEXT(0xffffffff80e52660->tqh_last) != NULL

2012-10-02 Thread Sean Bruno
On Mon, 2012-10-01 at 05:47 -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > Can you add extra printfs to see where exactly attach is failing? I > would > start with the attach routine in sys/dev/acpica/acpi_pcib_pci.c: > > hrm ... interesting side effects. After adding my printf's I don't hit the panic any more.

Re: stable/9 panic Bad tailq NEXT(0xffffffff80e52660->tqh_last) != NULL

2012-10-01 Thread John Baldwin
On Thursday, September 27, 2012 4:53:49 pm Sean Bruno wrote: > On Thu, 2012-09-27 at 10:52 -0700, Sean Bruno wrote: > > > > > > > pcib7: irq 19 at device 28.7 on pci0 > > > > panic: Bad tailq NEXT(0x80e52660->tqh_last) != NULL > > > > cpuid = 0 > > > > KDB: stack backtrace: > > > > db_tra

Re: stable/9 panic Bad tailq NEXT(0xffffffff80e52660->tqh_last) != NULL

2012-09-27 Thread Sean Bruno
On Thu, 2012-09-27 at 10:52 -0700, Sean Bruno wrote: > > > > > pcib7: irq 19 at device 28.7 on pci0 > > > panic: Bad tailq NEXT(0x80e52660->tqh_last) != NULL > > > cpuid = 0 > > > KDB: stack backtrace: > > > db_trace_self_wrapper() at db_trace_self_wrapper+0x2a > > > kdb_backtrace() at kd

Re: stable/9 panic Bad tailq NEXT(0xffffffff80e52660->tqh_last) != NULL

2012-09-27 Thread Sean Bruno
> > > pcib7: irq 19 at device 28.7 on pci0 > > panic: Bad tailq NEXT(0x80e52660->tqh_last) != NULL > > cpuid = 0 > > KDB: stack backtrace: > > db_trace_self_wrapper() at db_trace_self_wrapper+0x2a > > kdb_backtrace() at kdb_backtrace+0x37 > > panic() at panic+0x1d8 > > rman_init() at rman

Re: stable/9 panic Bad tailq NEXT(0xffffffff80e52660->tqh_last) != NULL

2012-07-30 Thread John Baldwin
On Monday, July 16, 2012 5:39:26 am Andriy Gapon wrote: > on 13/07/2012 19:31 Sean Bruno said the following: > > pcib7: at device 28.0 on pci0 > > pcib7: domain0 > > pcib7: secondary bus 7 > > pcib7: subordinate bus 7 > > pcib7: no prefetched decode > > device_attach: pci

Re: stable/9 panic Bad tailq NEXT(0xffffffff80e52660->tqh_last) != NULL

2012-07-20 Thread Sean Bruno
On Mon, 2012-07-16 at 02:39 -0700, Andriy Gapon wrote: > on 13/07/2012 19:31 Sean Bruno said the following: > > Well this is new. I haven't a clue what Dell has done on this R620, but > > this popped up today after I did a boat load of BIOS updates and tried > > to install stable/9 from our yaho

Re: stable/9 panic Bad tailq NEXT(0xffffffff80e52660->tqh_last) != NULL

2012-07-16 Thread Andriy Gapon
on 13/07/2012 19:31 Sean Bruno said the following: > Well this is new. I haven't a clue what Dell has done on this R620, but > this popped up today after I did a boat load of BIOS updates and tried > to install stable/9 from our yahoo tree. If anyone sees the obvious > solution here, I'd love to

stable/9 panic Bad tailq NEXT(0xffffffff80e52660->tqh_last) != NULL

2012-07-13 Thread Sean Bruno
Well this is new. I haven't a clue what Dell has done on this R620, but this popped up today after I did a boat load of BIOS updates and tried to install stable/9 from our yahoo tree. If anyone sees the obvious solution here, I'd love to figure it out. found-> vendor=0x14e4, dev=0x165f, revid=0x