Mark Lord wrote:
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
..
I try to come up with something, but I'm travelling tomorrow, so it
might be not before end of week.
Thanks, Thomas.
I believe we definitely want to nail this down before 2.6.22-final,
but there's a good workaround in the interim (CONFIG_DETECT_SOFTL
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
..
I try to come up with something, but I'm travelling tomorrow, so it
might be not before end of week.
Thanks, Thomas.
I believe we definitely want to nail this down before 2.6.22-final,
but there's a good workaround in the interim (CONFIG_DETECT_SOFTLOCKUP=y)
and we've
On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 18:29 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> Oh crap. It's back.
>
> I don't know what's different from before,
> but the system now locks up again exactly the same way,
> even with the lock contention fix applied.
Which is less surprising and confusing than the previous result. It
poin
Oh crap. It's back.
I don't know what's different from before,
but the system now locks up again exactly the same way,
even with the lock contention fix applied.
With or without CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=y in the config.
I've gotta get some work done here (this is my primary development machine),
s
On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 01:05 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > thanks. Can you apply this patch please:
> > http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/4/13/190
> >
> > It somehow did not make it into 2.6.21.
> >
>
> Alas, poor me. I ain't going to merge a contention-reduction patch when
> we're at -rc6. If a patch
re: [PATCH] highres/dyntick: prevent xtime lock contention
|mark> I have a new notebook (Dell Inspiron 9400) with Core2-Duo T7400 @ 2.1Ghz.
|mark> When either/both of CONFIG_NO_HZ, CONFIG_HIGH_RES_TIMERS is used,
|mark> the 2.6.21 kernel hangs on startup just after printing one/both of these:
|ma
On Wed, 02 May 2007 09:47:15 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mark,
>
> On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 12:52 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> > Done, and done.
> > And I managed to capture more of the boot messages, too.
> > This new capture is in the "sequence" subdir at the previous link.
>
Mark,
On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 12:52 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> Done, and done.
> And I managed to capture more of the boot messages, too.
> This new capture is in the "sequence" subdir at the previous link.
thanks. Can you apply this patch please:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/4/13/190
It somehow did n
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 10:13 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
Of possible interest is that the bottom of the 25line screen capture
differs somewhat from the 50line capture.. see for yourself.
This is 100% consistent from boot to boot.
Using CONFIG_DETECT_SOFTLOCKUP=y eliminates the
On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 12:31 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >
> > I meant disable HPET via: hpet=disable on the commandline
> >
> >> Screenshots for that are available here: http://rtr.ca/hrtimers/
>
> hpet=disable fails, without the "switched to high resolution timer"
> m
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
I meant disable HPET via: hpet=disable on the commandline
Screenshots for that are available here: http://rtr.ca/hrtimers/
hpet=disable fails, without the "switched to high resolution timer" message(s).
New snapshot of it now at the link above.
I also applied Tejun
On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 10:13 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> Of possible interest is that the bottom of the 25line screen capture
> differs somewhat from the 50line capture.. see for yourself.
> This is 100% consistent from boot to boot.
>
> Using CONFIG_DETECT_SOFTLOCKUP=y eliminates the problem,
> so t
On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 10:13 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 09:34 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> >>> now at 3232363876949 nsecs
> >> ...
> >>
> >> Oh, in case it matters any:
> >> that /proc/timer_list is from the system with CFS-V7 also patched in.
> >
> > It
Michal Piotrowski wrote:
On 01/05/07, Mark Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 09:34 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
>>> now at 3232363876949 nsecs
>> ...
>>
>> Oh, in case it matters any:
>> that /proc/timer_list is from the system with CFS-V7 also patched in.
On 01/05/07, Mark Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 09:34 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
>>> now at 3232363876949 nsecs
>> ...
>>
>> Oh, in case it matters any:
>> that /proc/timer_list is from the system with CFS-V7 also patched in.
>
> It should not. What h
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 09:34 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
now at 3232363876949 nsecs
...
Oh, in case it matters any:
that /proc/timer_list is from the system with CFS-V7 also patched in.
It should not. What happens when you disable HPET ?
Booting with clocksource=tsc still
On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 09:34 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> > now at 3232363876949 nsecs
> ...
>
> Oh, in case it matters any:
> that /proc/timer_list is from the system with CFS-V7 also patched in.
It should not. What happens when you disable HPET ?
tglx
-
To unsubscribe from this list: sen
Mark Lord wrote:
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
Mark,
On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 20:02 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
When it does boot with the modified .config file,
the log looks like the one attached to this email.
Can you please send me the output of /proc/timer_list ?
Timer List Version: v0.3
HRTIMER_MA
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
Mark,
On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 20:02 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
When it does boot with the modified .config file,
the log looks like the one attached to this email.
Can you please send me the output of /proc/timer_list ?
Timer List Version: v0.3
HRTIMER_MAX_CLOCK_BASES: 2
n
Mark,
On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 20:02 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> When it does boot with the modified .config file,
> the log looks like the one attached to this email.
Can you please send me the output of /proc/timer_list ?
tglx
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe li
On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 23:33 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> Daniel Walker wrote:
> >
> > I'm interested in which clocksource is getting used, which is in the
> > boot log.
>
> Well then, send me a patch that dumps that information out just before it
> locks up.
> We know (first post in this thread) th
On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 23:33 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> Daniel Walker wrote:
> >
> > I'm interested in which clocksource is getting used, which is in the
> > boot log.
>
> Well then, send me a patch that dumps that information out just before it
> locks up.
> We know (first post in this thread) th
Daniel Walker wrote:
I'm interested in which clocksource is getting used, which is in the
boot log.
Well then, send me a patch that dumps that information out just before it locks
up.
We know (first post in this thread) that the lockup occurs just after
these two messages:
"switched to high
On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 20:11 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> >
> > Please read chapter 3 {serial,net}console
> > http://www.stardust.webpages.pl/files/handbook/handbook-en.pdf
>
> No thanks.
>
> No serial, and netconsole doesn't work during early boot when it locks up.
> Besi
Michal Piotrowski wrote:
Please read chapter 3 {serial,net}console
http://www.stardust.webpages.pl/files/handbook/handbook-en.pdf
No thanks.
No serial, and netconsole doesn't work during early boot when it locks up.
Besides, we already know as much as the existing messages show.
-ml
-
To uns
Hi Mark,
On 01/05/07, Mark Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Daniel Walker wrote:
>
> Hmm, Do you have a boot log ? I didn't see one in any of the last emails.
When it doesn't boot, there's no log.
When it does boot with the modified .config file,
the log looks like the one attached to this emai
Daniel Walker wrote:
Hmm, Do you have a boot log ? I didn't see one in any of the last emails.
When it doesn't boot, there's no log.
When it does boot with the modified .config file,
the log looks like the one attached to this email.
Cheers
success.log.gz
Description: application/gzip
On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 19:36 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> Mark Lord wrote:
> > Mark Lord wrote:
> >> Mark Lord wrote:
> >>> I have a new notebook (Dell Inspiron 9400) with Core2-Duo T7400 @
> >>> 2.1Ghz.
> >>> When either/both of CONFIG_NO_HZ, CONFIG_HIGH_RES_TIMERS is used,
> >>> the 2.6.21 kernel ha
On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 19:36 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> Well, in case this helps. If I take the exact same .config that fails,
> and add *only* this to it, it then boots just fine.
>
>CONFIG_DETECT_SOFTLOCKUP=y
That's definitely helpful. Thanks for tracking it down. I look at it
tomorrow mor
Mark Lord wrote:
Mark Lord wrote:
Mark Lord wrote:
I have a new notebook (Dell Inspiron 9400) with Core2-Duo T7400 @
2.1Ghz.
When either/both of CONFIG_NO_HZ, CONFIG_HIGH_RES_TIMERS is used,
the 2.6.21 kernel hangs on startup just after printing one/both of
these:
..
That's a hard hang, by
Mark Lord wrote:
Mark Lord wrote:
I have a new notebook (Dell Inspiron 9400) with Core2-Duo T7400 @ 2.1Ghz.
When either/both of CONFIG_NO_HZ, CONFIG_HIGH_RES_TIMERS is used,
the 2.6.21 kernel hangs on startup just after printing one/both of these:
..
That's a hard hang, by the way. No magic s
Mark Lord wrote:
I have a new notebook (Dell Inspiron 9400) with Core2-Duo T7400 @ 2.1Ghz.
When either/both of CONFIG_NO_HZ, CONFIG_HIGH_RES_TIMERS is used,
the 2.6.21 kernel hangs on startup just after printing one/both of these:
..
That's a hard hang, by the way. No magic sysrq key or anythi
32 matches
Mail list logo
