[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200609101243.25772.linux@rainbow-software.org>
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2006 12:43:25 +0200
From: Ondrej Zary <linux@...nbow-software.org>
To: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kaber@...sh.net
Subject: Re: Oops after 30 days of uptime
On Sunday 10 September 2006 10:26, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Hi Ondrej,
>
> OK, I've analysed your oops with your kernel. My conclusions are that you
> have a hardware problem (most probably the CPU), because you've hit an
> impossible case :
>
> ip_nat_cheat_check() pushed the size of the data (8) on the stack, followed
> by the pointer to the data, then called csum_partial() :
>
> c01e657f: 6a 08 push $0x8
> c01e6581: 52 push %edx
> c01e6582: e8 a5 85 00 00 call c01eeb2c <csum_partial>
>
> In csum_partial(), ECX is filled with the size (8) and ESI with the data
> pointer (0xc0227ce8) :
>
> c01eeb32: 8b 4c 24 10 mov 0x10(%esp),%ecx
> c01eeb36: 8b 74 24 0c mov 0xc(%esp),%esi
>
> Then, the size is divided by 32 to count how many 32 bytes blocks can be
> read at a time. If the size is lower than 32, the code branches to a
> special location which reads 1 word at a time :
>
> c01eeb78: 89 ca mov %ecx,%edx
> c01eeb7a: c1 e9 05 shr $0x5,%ecx
> c01eeb7d: 74 32 je c01eebb1 <csum_partial+0x85>
>
> Your oops comes from a few instructions below. The branch has not been
> taken while it should have because (8 >> 5) == 0. You can also see from EDX
> in the oops that it really was 0x8 when copied from ECX. The rest is pretty
> obvious. The data are read 32 bytes at a time after ESI, and ECX is
> decreased by 1 every 32 bytes. When ESI+0x18 reaches an unmapped area
> (0xc2000000), you get the oops, and ECX = 0xfff113e8 as in your oops.
>
> Given that the failing instruction is the most common conditionnal jump, it
> is very fortunate that your system can work 30 days before crashing. I
> think that your CPU might be running too hot and might get wrong results
> during branch prediction. It's also possible that you have a poor power
> supply. However, I'm pretty sure that this is not a RAM problem.
Thank you very much for the analysis. Good that it's not a kernel bug.
The CPU is 33MHz UMC GreenCPU which does not run hot even without a heatsink.
It's powered directly from 5V so it might be the power supply.
> Best regards,
> Willy
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
Ondrej Zary
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists