[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141204002723.GB15239@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2014 19:27:23 -0500
From: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Chris Mason <clm@...com>,
Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Dâniel Fraga <fragabr@...il.com>,
Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: frequent lockups in 3.18rc4
On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 10:45:57AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 10:41 AM, Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> > I've been stuck on this kernel for a few days now trying to prove it
> > good/bad one way or the other, and I'm leaning towards good, given
> > that it recovers, even though the traces look similar.
>
> Ugh. But this does *not* happen with 3.16, right? Even the non-fatal case?
>
> If so, I'd be inclined to call it "bad". But there might well be two
> bugs: one that makes that NMI watchdog trigger, and another one that
> then makes it be a hard lockup. I'd think it would be good to figure
> out the "NMI watchdog starts triggering" one first, though.
So I just got a definite "bad" case on 17-rc1. got NMI spew from two
CPUs then the box was a boat anchor. Even keyboard stopped responding,
had to power cycle it to get it back up.
Given it took 2 days to prove this one, I'm really hoping subsequent
bisect branches prove themselves faster.
Dave
--
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