On Tuesday 05 February 2008 01:49, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 06:47 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 16:25 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 22 January 2008 16:03, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > > > I've hit same twice recently (not pan, and not
On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 06:47 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 16:25 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > On Tuesday 22 January 2008 16:03, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
> > > I've hit same twice recently (not pan, and not repeatable).
> >
> > Nasty. The attached patch is something really
On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 06:47 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 16:25 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
On Tuesday 22 January 2008 16:03, Mike Galbraith wrote:
I've hit same twice recently (not pan, and not repeatable).
Nasty. The attached patch is something really simple that
On Tuesday 05 February 2008 01:49, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 06:47 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 16:25 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
On Tuesday 22 January 2008 16:03, Mike Galbraith wrote:
I've hit same twice recently (not pan, and not repeatable).
On Friday 01 February 2008 09:45, Frederik Himpe wrote:
> On ma, 2008-01-28 at 12:46 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > On Sunday 27 January 2008 00:29, Frederik Himpe wrote:
> > > On di, 2008-01-22 at 16:25 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > > > > > On Tuesday 22 January 2008 07:58, Frederik Himpe wrote:
>
On Friday 01 February 2008 09:45, Frederik Himpe wrote:
On ma, 2008-01-28 at 12:46 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
On Sunday 27 January 2008 00:29, Frederik Himpe wrote:
On di, 2008-01-22 at 16:25 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
On Tuesday 22 January 2008 07:58, Frederik Himpe wrote:
With
On ma, 2008-01-28 at 12:46 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> On Sunday 27 January 2008 00:29, Frederik Himpe wrote:
> > On di, 2008-01-22 at 16:25 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday 22 January 2008 07:58, Frederik Himpe wrote:
> > > > > > With Linux 2.6.24-rc8 I often have the problem that
On ma, 2008-01-28 at 12:46 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
On Sunday 27 January 2008 00:29, Frederik Himpe wrote:
On di, 2008-01-22 at 16:25 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
On Tuesday 22 January 2008 07:58, Frederik Himpe wrote:
With Linux 2.6.24-rc8 I often have the problem that the pan usenet
On ma, 2008-01-28 at 12:46 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> On Sunday 27 January 2008 00:29, Frederik Himpe wrote:
> > On di, 2008-01-22 at 16:25 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > > > > On Tuesday 22 January 2008 07:58, Frederik Himpe wrote:
> > > > > > With Linux 2.6.24-rc8 I often have the problem that
On ma, 2008-01-28 at 12:46 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
On Sunday 27 January 2008 00:29, Frederik Himpe wrote:
On di, 2008-01-22 at 16:25 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
On Tuesday 22 January 2008 07:58, Frederik Himpe wrote:
With Linux 2.6.24-rc8 I often have the problem that the pan usenet
On Sunday 27 January 2008 01:27, Pascal Terjan wrote:
> Nick Piggin yahoo.com.au> writes:
> > On Sunday 27 January 2008 00:29, Frederik Himpe wrote:
> > > I just succeeded to reproduce the problem with this patch. Does this
> > > smell like an XFS problem?
>
> I got the same issue using ext3
>
>
On Sunday 27 January 2008 00:29, Frederik Himpe wrote:
> On di, 2008-01-22 at 16:25 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday 22 January 2008 07:58, Frederik Himpe wrote:
> > > > > With Linux 2.6.24-rc8 I often have the problem that the pan usenet
> > > > > reader starts using 100% of CPU time
On Sunday 27 January 2008 01:27, Pascal Terjan wrote:
Nick Piggin nickpiggin at yahoo.com.au writes:
On Sunday 27 January 2008 00:29, Frederik Himpe wrote:
I just succeeded to reproduce the problem with this patch. Does this
smell like an XFS problem?
I got the same issue using ext3
Nick Piggin yahoo.com.au> writes:
> On Sunday 27 January 2008 00:29, Frederik Himpe wrote:
> > I just succeeded to reproduce the problem with this patch. Does this
> > smell like an XFS problem?
I got the same issue using ext3
> Possible. Though I think it is more likely to be a bug in the
>
On Sunday 27 January 2008 00:29, Frederik Himpe wrote:
> On di, 2008-01-22 at 16:25 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday 22 January 2008 07:58, Frederik Himpe wrote:
> > > > > With Linux 2.6.24-rc8 I often have the problem that the pan usenet
> > > > > reader starts using 100% of CPU time
On di, 2008-01-22 at 16:25 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 22 January 2008 07:58, Frederik Himpe wrote:
> > > > With Linux 2.6.24-rc8 I often have the problem that the pan usenet
> > > > reader starts using 100% of CPU time after some time. When this
> > > > happens, kill -9 does not
On Sunday 27 January 2008 00:29, Frederik Himpe wrote:
On di, 2008-01-22 at 16:25 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
On Tuesday 22 January 2008 07:58, Frederik Himpe wrote:
With Linux 2.6.24-rc8 I often have the problem that the pan usenet
reader starts using 100% of CPU time after some
Nick Piggin nickpiggin at yahoo.com.au writes:
On Sunday 27 January 2008 00:29, Frederik Himpe wrote:
I just succeeded to reproduce the problem with this patch. Does this
smell like an XFS problem?
I got the same issue using ext3
Possible. Though I think it is more likely to be a bug in
On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 16:25:58 +1100, Nick Piggin said:
>
> Index: linux-2.6/kernel/sched.c
> ===
> --- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/sched.c
> +++ linux-2.6/kernel/sched.c
> @@ -4920,8 +4920,7 @@ static void show_task(struct task_struct
>
On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 16:25:58 +1100, Nick Piggin said:
Index: linux-2.6/kernel/sched.c
===
--- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/sched.c
+++ linux-2.6/kernel/sched.c
@@ -4920,8 +4920,7 @@ static void show_task(struct task_struct
On Tuesday 22 January 2008 21:37, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Well I've twice tried to submit a patch to print stacks for running
> > tasks as well, but nobody seems interested. It would at least give a
> > chance to see something.
>
> i definitely remembering
* Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Index: linux-2.6/kernel/sched.c
> ===
> --- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/sched.c
> +++ linux-2.6/kernel/sched.c
> @@ -4920,8 +4920,7 @@ static void show_task(struct task_struct
>
* Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 January 2008 07:58, Frederik Himpe wrote:
> > With Linux 2.6.24-rc8 I often have the problem that the pan usenet
> > reader starts using 100% of CPU time after some time. When this happens,
> > kill -9 does not work, and strace just hangs
* Nick Piggin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday 22 January 2008 07:58, Frederik Himpe wrote:
With Linux 2.6.24-rc8 I often have the problem that the pan usenet
reader starts using 100% of CPU time after some time. When this happens,
kill -9 does not work, and strace just hangs when
* Nick Piggin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Index: linux-2.6/kernel/sched.c
===
--- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/sched.c
+++ linux-2.6/kernel/sched.c
@@ -4920,8 +4920,7 @@ static void show_task(struct task_struct
printk(KERN_CONT
On Tuesday 22 January 2008 21:37, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Nick Piggin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well I've twice tried to submit a patch to print stacks for running
tasks as well, but nobody seems interested. It would at least give a
chance to see something.
i definitely remembering having
On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 16:25 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 January 2008 16:03, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > I've hit same twice recently (not pan, and not repeatable).
>
> Nasty. The attached patch is something really simple that can sometimes help.
> sysrq+p is also an option, if
On Tuesday 22 January 2008 16:03, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 11:05 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > On Tuesday 22 January 2008 07:58, Frederik Himpe wrote:
> > > With Linux 2.6.24-rc8 I often have the problem that the pan usenet
> > > reader starts using 100% of CPU time after some
On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 11:05 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 January 2008 07:58, Frederik Himpe wrote:
> > With Linux 2.6.24-rc8 I often have the problem that the pan usenet
> > reader starts using 100% of CPU time after some time. When this happens,
> > kill -9 does not work, and strace
On Tuesday 22 January 2008 07:58, Frederik Himpe wrote:
> With Linux 2.6.24-rc8 I often have the problem that the pan usenet
> reader starts using 100% of CPU time after some time. When this happens,
> kill -9 does not work, and strace just hangs when trying to attach to
> the process. The same
With Linux 2.6.24-rc8 I often have the problem that the pan usenet
reader starts using 100% of CPU time after some time. When this happens,
kill -9 does not work, and strace just hangs when trying to attach to
the process. The same with gdb. ps shows the process as being in the R
state.
I
With Linux 2.6.24-rc8 I often have the problem that the pan usenet
reader starts using 100% of CPU time after some time. When this happens,
kill -9 does not work, and strace just hangs when trying to attach to
the process. The same with gdb. ps shows the process as being in the R
state.
I
On Tuesday 22 January 2008 07:58, Frederik Himpe wrote:
With Linux 2.6.24-rc8 I often have the problem that the pan usenet
reader starts using 100% of CPU time after some time. When this happens,
kill -9 does not work, and strace just hangs when trying to attach to
the process. The same with
On Tuesday 22 January 2008 16:03, Mike Galbraith wrote:
On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 11:05 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
On Tuesday 22 January 2008 07:58, Frederik Himpe wrote:
With Linux 2.6.24-rc8 I often have the problem that the pan usenet
reader starts using 100% of CPU time after some time.
On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 16:25 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
On Tuesday 22 January 2008 16:03, Mike Galbraith wrote:
I've hit same twice recently (not pan, and not repeatable).
Nasty. The attached patch is something really simple that can sometimes help.
sysrq+p is also an option, if you're on a
35 matches
Mail list logo
