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

Re: HyperSPARC patches (?)


One day, 23 hours, 10 minutes, 12 seconds ago, 
Jurij Smakov wrote:
> Ok, I did some digging. Since people also see this bug on Ultra1, it must 
> be esp-specific. Most recent change to esp.c dates to February 2006, all 
> other changes are over a year old, so it's pretty unlikely that they are 
> the cause of this problem. The recent change [0], on the other hand, looks 
> pretty suspicious to me, since it changes the locking order. I've built a 
> kernel with this change reverted, and was not able to crash the machine by 
> running two concurrent loops of unpacking/removing the kernel tree for an 
> hour. I'd appreciate if you could test this kernel, it is available at 
> [1]. By the way, this problem has been also reported to kernel's bugzilla
> as bug 6344 [2].
> [0] 
> http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=a6ceda7457b2303dcb07d3c472b25d52bbdb5a29
> [1] 
> http://www.wooyd.org/debian/kernels/linux-image-2.6.16-1-sparc32_2.6.16-6_sparc.deb
> [2] http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6344

In fact, I was using 2.6.14 (with Bob Breuer's SMP patch) which does
_not_ have this lock sequence change.

Now, I tried to apply this lock sequence change to my 2.6.14 tree to see
what happens and, well, the kernel does not hang as early as before but
I'm still getting "DMA error" messages and it panics soon enough as

I also tried to remove on out of the two SCSI disks without any success.


Reply to: