[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070305115111.GA10675@elte.hu>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 12:51:11 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Michal Piotrowski <michal.k.k.piotrowski@...il.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 2.6.21-rc2-git3 soft lockup detected on CPU#0 (crash dump kernel)
* Michal Piotrowski <michal.k.k.piotrowski@...il.com> wrote:
> >also below is a softlockup-debug patch that might be useful, which adds
> >a tick/tock output so it spams the console once per second but can show
> >the dynamics of lockups (and other delays).
>
> I have applied this patch
> http://www.stardust.webpages.pl/files/tbf/bitis-gabonica/2.6.21-rc2-git3-kdump/log3.txt
thanks. It seems that the 'BUG: soft lockup detected' message does not
occur in this log though - and that there are bootup messages between
the two sysrq outputs:
[ 221.101833] skge eth1: disabling interface
[ 228.740911] audit(1173094442.943:11): user pid=3245 uid=0
auid=4294967295 subj=system_u:system_r:hwclock_t:s0 msg='changing system
time: exe="/sbin/hwclock"
(hostname=?, addr=?, terminal=console res=success)'
[ 233.148571] md: md1 in immediate safe mode
plus there's trouble with irq 10:
[ 132.013194] irq 10: nobody cared (try booting with the "irqpoll" option)
[ 132.072771] Disabling IRQ #10
that prompted you to enable irqpoll, right? So am i right that without
irqpoll there's no lockup?
Ingo
-
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