Dear Will,
Thanks for your input. We debug by adding print as below and found
very big value difference between next and owner(more then 1000). So
it seams memory corruption.
linux/lib/spinlock_debug.c
msg, raw_smp_processor_id(),
current->comm, task_pid_nr(cur
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 06:37:31AM +, naveen yadav wrote:
> Thanks for your reply,
>
> We are using Cortex A15.
> yes, this is with ticket lock.
>
> We will check value of arch_spinlock_t and share it. It is bit
> difficult to reproduce this scenario.
>
> If you have some idea ,please sugge
Dear Will,
Thanks for your reply,
We are using Cortex A15.
yes, this is with ticket lock.
We will check value of arch_spinlock_t and share it. It is bit
difficult to reproduce this scenario.
If you have some idea ,please suggest how to reproduce it.
thanks
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Wi
On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 07:25:51AM +, naveen yadav wrote:
> We are using 3.8.x kernel on ARM, We are facing soft lockup issue.
> Following are the logs.
Which CPU/SoC are you using?
> BUG: spinlock lockup suspected on CPU#0, process1/525
> lock: 0xd8ac9a64, .magic: dead4ead, .owner: /-1, .ow
On Fri, 2013-04-26 at 15:08 +0100, Mark Jackson wrote:
> I've encountered a lockup on ubifs ... any ideas ?
>
> # ifup eth1
> [ 3451.254040] Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual
> address
> [ 3451.262627] pgd = cf468000
> [ 3451.265489] [] *pgd=8f48c831, *p
Jarek Poplawski wrote, On 02/15/2008 10:03 PM:
...
> ...On the other hand this:
>
>> Feb 15 15:50:17 217.151.X.X [1521315.068984] BUG: spinlock lockup on CPU#1,
>> ksoftirqd/1/7, f0551180
>
> seems to point just at spinlock lockup, so it's more about the full report.
> I wonder if this patch to
Jarek Poplawski wrote, On 02/15/2008 09:21 PM:
> Denys Fedoryshchenko wrote, On 02/15/2008 08:42 PM:
> ...
>
>> I have similar crashes on completely different hardware with same job (QOS),
>> so i think it is actually some nasty bug in networking.
>
> Maybe you could try with some other debuggi
Denys Fedoryshchenko wrote, On 02/15/2008 08:42 PM:
...
> I have similar crashes on completely different hardware with same job (QOS),
> so i think it is actually some nasty bug in networking.
Maybe you could try with some other debugging options? E.g. since lockdep
doesn't help - turn this off.
This server was working fine under load under FreeBSD, and worked fine before
with other tasks under Linux. I dont think it is RAM.
Additionally it is server hardware (Dell PowerEdge) with ECC, MCE and other
layers, who will report about any hardware issue most probably, and i think
even better
2008/2/15 Denys Fedoryshchenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I have random crashes, at least once per week. It is very difficult to catch
> error message, and only recently i setup netconsole. Now i got crash, but
> there is no traceback and only single line came over netconsole, mentioned
> before.
10 matches
Mail list logo
