On Mon, 2009-09-07 at 09:25 +0200, Darck wrote:
> > This bug report is about systems that are *not* making use of
> > SCHED_IDLE, which are probably not due to the known scheduler bug. This
> > particular error message typically indicates a lock ordering bug or
> > infinite delay while holding a lock, and can be caused by any kernel
> > component.
> >
> > One such case was fixed in version 2.6.26-16:
> >
> > * Fix soft lockups caused by one md resync blocking on another due
> > to sharing the same device (closes: #514627)
> >
> > Ben.
>
> Hi,
>
> Unfortunately, this fix did not solve the problem. I booted on the
> last kernel revision 2.6.26-19-xen yesterday, and it crashed one hour
> later with the "blocked for more than 120 seconds" message.
This is not exactly a crash, though I realise the effects are often just
as bad as a crash.
> I use Xen with a SAN backend (4 FC links / QLogic ISP2432 card) using
> multipathd. It happens on 54XX and 55XX intel processors ; with or
> without booting on SAN, and randomly. SADC was the most common process
> triggering this bug.
>
> If I understand well, it should be related to this bug: #517449 ?
Could be.
Please send the kernel logs showing the "blocked for more than 120
seconds" messages and the following function call traces.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans.
- John Lennon
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part