linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] NFS regression in 2.6.26?, "task blocked for more than 120 seconds"

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5d6222a80810200615k60d6f523p9bcd71d8cb070a39@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 20 Oct 2008 11:15:56 -0200
From:	"Glauber Costa" <glommer@...il.com>
To:	"Max Kellermann" <mk@...all.com>
Cc:	"Glauber Costa" <glommer@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	ijc@...lion.org.uk, "Grant Coady" <grant_lkml@...o.com.au>,
	"Trond Myklebust" <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>,
	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
	"Tom Tucker" <tom@...ngridcomputing.com>, gorcunov@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] NFS regression in 2.6.26?, "task blocked for more than 120 seconds"

On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 4:51 AM, Max Kellermann <mk@...all.com> wrote:
> On 2008/10/17 16:33, Glauber Costa <glommer@...hat.com> wrote:
>> That's probably something related to apic congestion.
>> Does the problem go away if the only thing you change is this:
>>
>>
>> > @@ -891,11 +897,6 @@ do_rest:
>> >             store_NMI_vector(&nmi_high, &nmi_low);
>> >
>> >             smpboot_setup_warm_reset_vector(start_ip);
>> > -           /*
>> > -            * Be paranoid about clearing APIC errors.
>> > -           */
>> > -           apic_write(APIC_ESR, 0);
>> > -           apic_read(APIC_ESR);
>> >     }
>>
>>
>> Please let me know.
>
> Hello Glauber,
>
> I have rebooted the server with 2.6.27.1 + this patchlet an hour ago.
> No problems since.
>
> Hardware: Compaq P4 Xeon server, Broadcom CMIC-WS / CIOB-X2 board.
> Tell me if you need more detailed information.
>

There's a patch in flight from cyrill that probably fixes your problem:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/9/15/93

The checks are obviously there for a reason, and we can't just wipe
them out unconditionally ;-) So can you check please that you are also
covered by the case provided?

> On 2008/10/20 08:27, Ian Campbell <ijc@...lion.org.uk> wrote:
>> The issue I see still occurs well before those changesets. I have
>> seen it with v2.6.25 but v2.6.24 survived for 7 days without issue
>> (my threshold for a good kernel is 7 days, hence bisecting is a bit
>> slow...).
>
> Hello Ian,
>
> it seems we're hunting down different bugs after all.  Too bad, I
> hoped I could have solved your problem, too.  Our machine has been
> running well over the weekend with the patch I posted; with faulty
> kernels, the problem would occur after a few minutes.
>
> Max
> --
> 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/
>



-- 
Glauber  Costa.
"Free as in Freedom"
http://glommer.net

"The less confident you are, the more serious you have to act."
--
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/