[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: open issues with the hppa port

On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 11:53 PM, dann frazier<dannf@dannf.org> wrote:
> We have been running with UP kernels for quite some time, and they
> haven't proven to be any more stable. Most recently I've upgraded
> peri/penalosa to 2.6.31-rc6-based kernels since they were inclusive of
> the various changes I was pointed to on this list (thanks John/Helge).

Where exactly did you get this kernel, do you have a URL reference?

> peri has been surprisingly stable - uptime of 2 weeks so far, and it
> seems to be under pretty steady build load.

That sounds great.

> penalosa is a different story - it has been very unstable with uptimes
> of several hours at most. The hardware/kernel packages are identical
> to that of peri (afaict), so I'm not sure why. The failure mode
> results in infinite panics being printed to the console - but every
> time I've seen it I haven't had enough console history to see the
> beginning of this crash. I am now logging the console to see if I can
> capture that. It is of course possible that penalosa is having
> hardware problems - but I don't know of a way to prove this
> conclusively. We could maybe swap disks to see if the failure follows
> the disks or the hardware (though that doesn't eliminate a disk
> problem).

The way to prove this is to put an instrumented kernel on penalosa.

I think the way forward is:
* You get me a console trace.
* I give you an instrumented kernel/initrd.
* Repeat.

Are you allowed to boot a kernel/initrd that I send you?

> Note that I don't monitor the build output, so I don't know if we're
> still seeing the same level of random segfaults in userland.
> LaMont?


Reply to: