From: dafreedm@gmail.com
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@gmx.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
dafreedm@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Consistent kernel oops with 3.11.10 & 3.12.9 on Haswell CPUs...
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2014 10:26:09 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140323142609.GK1817@ofan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140323132535.GE2813@quack.suse.cz>
Hi Jan,
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Sat 22-03-14 14:18:39, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Sat, 22 Mar 2014, dafreedm@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > Ahh. Good call. I wasn't sophisticated enough with these things to
> > > ascertain the difference. I knew to avoid reporting oops/panics with
> > > kernels tainted with out-of-tree (non-free) modules, but I guess I
> > > grabbed the wrong lines from the dmesg (namely, subsequent oops after
> > > the initial one). Here's a more recent kernel oops (from this
> > > morning) --- it's the first oops after a fresh reboot:
> >
> > Cc'ing ext4 and block folks.
> Hum, so decodecode shows:
> ...
> 26: 48 85 c0 test %rax,%rax
> 29: 74 10 je 0x3b
> 2b:* 0f b7 80 ac 05 00 00 movzwl 0x5ac(%rax),%eax <-- trapping instruction
> 32: 66 85 c0 test %ax,%ax
> ...
>
> And the register has:
> RAX: f7ff880037267140 RBX: 0000000000001000 RCX: 0000000000000000
>
> So that looks like a bitbflip the upper byte.
Just for my own knowledge / growth --- how can you tell there's a
"bitbflip" on the upper byte?
> So I'd check the hardware first...
Yes, I absolutely did check the HW first --- and repeatedly (over a
couple of weeks) --- before reaching out to LKML.
As described in my original email below, here's what I've done so far:
I've been very extensively testing all of the likely culprits among
hardware components on both of my servers --- running memtest86 upon
boot for 3+ days, memtester in userspace for 24 hours, repeated
kernel compiles with various '-j' values, and the 'stress' and
'stressapptest' load generators (see below for full details) --- and
I have never seen even a hiccup in server operation under such
"artificial" environments --- however, it consistently occurs with
heavy md5sum operation, and randomly at other times.
More specifically, here are the exact stept I took to try to implicate
the HW:
aptitude install memtest86+ # reboot and run for 3+ days
aptitude install memtester
memtester 30G
aptitude install linux-source
cp /usr/src/linux-source-3.2.tar.bz2 /root/
tar xvfj linux-source-3.2.tar.bz2
cd linux-source-3.2/
make defconfig
time make 1>LOG 2>ERR
make mrproper
make defconfig
time make -j16 1>LOG 2>ERR
aptitude install stress
stress --cpu 8 --io 4 --vm 2 --timeout 10s --dry-run
stress --cpu 8 --io 4 --vm 2 --hdd 3 --timeout 60s
stress --cpu 8 --io 8 --vm 8 --hdd 4 --timeout 5m
aptitude install stressapptest
stressapptest -m 8 -i 4 -C 4 -W -s 30
stressapptest -m 8 -i 4 -C 4 -W -f /root/sat-file-test --filesize 1gb -s 30
stressapptest -m 8 -i 4 -C 4 -W -f /root/sat-file-test --filesize 1024 --random-threads 4 -s 30
stressapptest -m 8 -i 4 -C 4 -W --cc_test -s 30
stressapptest -m 8 -i 4 -C 4 -W --local_numa -s 30
stressapptest -m 8 -i 4 -C 4 -W -n 127.0.0.1 --listen -s 30
stressapptest -m 12 -i 6 -C 8 -W -f /root/sat-file-test --filesize 1024 --random-threads 4 -n 127.0.0.1 --listen -s 300
As mentioned earlier --- I just could not make it oops doing the
above! (or get any errors in the standalone memtest86+ procedure).
What do you think? Should I just keep on stress-testing it somewhat
indefinitely? Also, please recall that I have two of the identical
machines, and I suffer the same problems with both of them (and they
both pass the above artificial stress-testing).
Thoughts or suggestions, please, for me to explore further...
Thanks again!
> > > [33488.170415] general protection fault: 0000 [#1] SMP
> > > [33488.171351] Modules linked in: dm_crypt dm_mod parport_pc ppdev lp parport bnep rfcomm bluetooth rfkill cpufreq_stats cpufreq_userspace cpufreq_conservative cpufreq_powersave nfsd auth_rpcgss oid_registry nfs_acl nfs lockd fscache sunrpc netconsole configfs loop raid1 md_mod snd_hda_codec_realtek snd_hda_codec_hdmi hid_kensington x86_pkg_temp_thermal coretemp joydev kvm_intel hid_generic kvm crct10dif_pclmul snd_hda_intel crc32_pclmul crc32c_intel snd_hda_codec usbhid snd_hwdep hid ghash_clmulni_intel snd_pcm iTCO_wdt iTCO_vendor_support snd_page_alloc aesni_intel i915 snd_seq aes_x86_64 snd_seq_device snd_timer lrw evdev gf128mul glue_helper drm_kms_helper ablk_helper snd psmouse cryptd drm i2c_i801 pcspkr soundcore serio_raw lpc_ich mei_me mei mfd_core video button processor ext
4 crc16 mbcache jbd2 sg sd_mod crc_t10dif crct10dif_common ahci libahci xhci_hcd ehci_pci ehci_hcd e1000e libata igb scsi_mod i2c_algo_bit i2c_core dca ptp pps_core fan usbcore usb_common thermal therma
> > l_sys
> > > [33488.177102] CPU: 0 PID: 340 Comm: jbd2/sdd2-8 Not tainted 3.12-0.bpo.1-amd64 #1 Debian 3.12.9-1~bpo70+1
> > > [33488.178100] Hardware name: Supermicro X10SLQ/X10SLQ, BIOS 1.00 05/09/2013
> > > [33488.179095] task: ffff88081b179080 ti: ffff88081b3ee000 task.ti: ffff88081b3ee000
> > > [33488.180102] RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff811b6b22>] [<ffffffff811b6b22>] __getblk+0x52/0x2c0
> > > [33488.181117] RSP: 0018:ffff88081b3efb78 EFLAGS: 00010282
> > > [33488.182127] RAX: f7ff880037267140 RBX: 0000000000001000 RCX: 0000000000000000
> > > [33488.183142] RDX: 00000000000001ff RSI: 000000000148b2ac RDI: 0000000000000000
> > > [33488.184152] RBP: ffff88081b2a4800 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: ffff8807eccca628
> > > [33488.185168] R10: 00000000000032ad R11: 0000000000000001 R12: 0000000000000000
> > > [33488.186182] R13: ffff88081bcf67c0 R14: 00000000532d22fd R15: 000000000148b2ac
> > > [33488.187194] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff88083fa00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
> > > [33488.188212] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
> > > [33488.189228] CR2: ffffffffff600400 CR3: 000000000180c000 CR4: 00000000001407f0
> > > [33488.190245] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
> > > [33488.191268] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
> > > [33488.192279] Stack:
> > > [33488.193273] 0000000000000000 ffffffffa01ec1ba ffff88081b179080 ffff88081b2a4800
> > > [33488.194276] 00000000000032ac 0000000000000000 ffff88081b2a4800 ffff88081b2a4800
> > > [33488.195265] ffff8807f36b4688 00000000532d22fd 00000000ffffffff ffffffffa01737d0
> > > [33488.196246] Call Trace:
> > > [33488.197222] [<ffffffffa01ec1ba>] ? ext4_bmap+0x5a/0x110 [ext4]
> > > [33488.198210] [<ffffffffa01737d0>] ? jbd2_journal_get_descriptor_buffer+0x30/0x80 [jbd2]
> > > [33488.199203] [<ffffffff811b5100>] ? __wait_on_buffer+0x30/0x30
> > > [33488.200196] [<ffffffffa016aedd>] ? journal_submit_commit_record.isra.12+0x9d/0x200 [jbd2]
> > > [33488.201193] [<ffffffff811b5100>] ? __wait_on_buffer+0x30/0x30
> > > [33488.202198] [<ffffffffa016c1f4>] ? jbd2_journal_commit_transaction+0x11b4/0x18c0 [jbd2]
> > > [33488.203211] [<ffffffffa01706cc>] ? kjournald2+0xac/0x240 [jbd2]
> > > [33488.204219] [<ffffffff81082d20>] ? add_wait_queue+0x60/0x60
> > > [33488.205226] [<ffffffffa0170620>] ? commit_timeout+0x10/0x10 [jbd2]
> > > [33488.206230] [<ffffffff81082333>] ? kthread+0xb3/0xc0
> > > [33488.207230] [<ffffffff81082280>] ? flush_kthread_worker+0xa0/0xa0
> > > [33488.208231] [<ffffffff814cb70c>] ? ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
> > > [33488.209224] [<ffffffff81082280>] ? flush_kthread_worker+0xa0/0xa0
> > > [33488.210205] Code: 12 48 83 c4 28 4c 89 e0 5b 5d 41 5c 41 5d 41 5e 41 5f c3 49 8b 85 98 00 00 00 ba ff 01 00 00 48 8b 80 58 03 00 00 48 85 c0 74 10 <0f> b7 80 ac 05 00 00 66 85 c0 0f 85 cd 01 00 00 85 da 0f 85 d2
> > > [33488.212277] RIP [<ffffffff811b6b22>] __getblk+0x52/0x2c0
> > > [33488.213276] RSP <ffff88081b3efb78>
> > > [33488.370823] ---[ end trace cf90c18d45ff9570 ]---
> > >
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> > >
> > > Ingo, Peter, Thomas, any further ideas, please?
> > >
> > >
> > > > > Though at times the oops occur even when the system is largely idle,
> > > > > they seem to be exacerbated by md5sum'ing all files on a large
> > > > > partition as part of archive verification --- say 1 million files
> > > > > corresponding to 1 TByte of storage. If I perform this repeatedly,
> > > > > the machines seem to lock up about once a week. Strangely, other
> > > > > typical high-load/high-stress scenarios don't seem to provoke the oops
> > > > > nearly so much (see below).
> > > > >
> > > > > Naturally, such md5sum usage is putting heavy load on the processor,
> > > > > memory, and even power supply, and my initial inclination is generally
> > > > > that I must have some faulty components. Even after otherwise
> > > > > ambiguous diagnostics (described below), I'm highly skeptical that
> > > > > there's anything here inherent to the md5sum codebase, in particular.
> > > > > However, I have started to wonder whether this might be a kernel
> > > > > regression...
> > > > >
> > > > > For reference, here's my setup:
> > > > >
> > > > > Mainboard: Supermicro X10SLQ
> > > > > Processor: (Single-Socket) Intel Haswell i7-4770S (65W max TDP)
> > > > > Memory: 32GB Kingston DDR3 RAM (4x KVR16N11/8)
> > > > > PSU: SeaSonic SS-400FL2 400W PSU
> > > > > O/S: Debian v7.4 Wheezy (amd64)
> > > > > Filesystem: Ext4 (with default settings upon creation) over LUKS
> > > > > Kernel: Using both:
> > > > > Linux 3.11.10 ('3.11-0.bpo.2-amd64' via wheezy-backports)
> > > > > Linux 3.12.9 ('3.12-0.bpo.2-amd64' via wheezy-backports)
> > > > >
> > > > > To summarize where I am now: I've been very extensively testing all of
> > > > > the likely culprits among hardware components on both of my servers
> > > > > --- running memtest86 upon boot for 3+ days, memtester in userspace
> > > > > for 24 hours, repeated kernel compiles with various '-j' values, and
> > > > > the 'stress' and 'stressapptest' load generators (see [2] for full
> > > > > details) --- and I have never seen even a hiccup in server operation
> > > > > under such "artificial" environments --- however, it consistently
> > > > > occurs with heavy md5sum operation, and randomly at other times.
> > > > >
> > > > > At least from my past experiences (with scientific HPC clusters), such
> > > > > diagnostic results would normally seem to largely rule out most
> > > > > problems with the processor, memory, mainboard subsystems. The PSU is
> > > > > often a little harder to rule out, but the 400W Seasonic PSUs are
> > > > > rated at 2--3 times the wattage I should really need, even under peak
> > > > > load (given each server's single-socket CPU is 65W at max TDP, there
> > > > > are only a few HDs and one SSD, and no discrete graphics at all, of
> > > > > course).
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm further surprised to see the exact same kernel-crash behavior on
> > > > > two separate, but identical, servers, which leads me to wonder if
> > > > > there's possibly some regression between the hardware (given that it's
> > > > > relatively new Haswell microcode / silicon) and the (kernel?)
> > > > > software.
> > > > >
> > > > > Any thoughts on what might be occurring here? Or what I should focus
> > > > > on? Thanks in advance.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: dafreedm@gmail.com
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@gmx.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
dafreedm@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Consistent kernel oops with 3.11.10 & 3.12.9 on Haswell CPUs...
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2014 10:26:09 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140323142609.GK1817@ofan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140323132535.GE2813@quack.suse.cz>
Hi Jan,
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Sat 22-03-14 14:18:39, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Sat, 22 Mar 2014, dafreedm@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > Ahh. Good call. I wasn't sophisticated enough with these things to
> > > ascertain the difference. I knew to avoid reporting oops/panics with
> > > kernels tainted with out-of-tree (non-free) modules, but I guess I
> > > grabbed the wrong lines from the dmesg (namely, subsequent oops after
> > > the initial one). Here's a more recent kernel oops (from this
> > > morning) --- it's the first oops after a fresh reboot:
> >
> > Cc'ing ext4 and block folks.
> Hum, so decodecode shows:
> ...
> 26: 48 85 c0 test %rax,%rax
> 29: 74 10 je 0x3b
> 2b:* 0f b7 80 ac 05 00 00 movzwl 0x5ac(%rax),%eax <-- trapping instruction
> 32: 66 85 c0 test %ax,%ax
> ...
>
> And the register has:
> RAX: f7ff880037267140 RBX: 0000000000001000 RCX: 0000000000000000
>
> So that looks like a bitbflip the upper byte.
Just for my own knowledge / growth --- how can you tell there's a
"bitbflip" on the upper byte?
> So I'd check the hardware first...
Yes, I absolutely did check the HW first --- and repeatedly (over a
couple of weeks) --- before reaching out to LKML.
As described in my original email below, here's what I've done so far:
I've been very extensively testing all of the likely culprits among
hardware components on both of my servers --- running memtest86 upon
boot for 3+ days, memtester in userspace for 24 hours, repeated
kernel compiles with various '-j' values, and the 'stress' and
'stressapptest' load generators (see below for full details) --- and
I have never seen even a hiccup in server operation under such
"artificial" environments --- however, it consistently occurs with
heavy md5sum operation, and randomly at other times.
More specifically, here are the exact stept I took to try to implicate
the HW:
aptitude install memtest86+ # reboot and run for 3+ days
aptitude install memtester
memtester 30G
aptitude install linux-source
cp /usr/src/linux-source-3.2.tar.bz2 /root/
tar xvfj linux-source-3.2.tar.bz2
cd linux-source-3.2/
make defconfig
time make 1>LOG 2>ERR
make mrproper
make defconfig
time make -j16 1>LOG 2>ERR
aptitude install stress
stress --cpu 8 --io 4 --vm 2 --timeout 10s --dry-run
stress --cpu 8 --io 4 --vm 2 --hdd 3 --timeout 60s
stress --cpu 8 --io 8 --vm 8 --hdd 4 --timeout 5m
aptitude install stressapptest
stressapptest -m 8 -i 4 -C 4 -W -s 30
stressapptest -m 8 -i 4 -C 4 -W -f /root/sat-file-test --filesize 1gb -s 30
stressapptest -m 8 -i 4 -C 4 -W -f /root/sat-file-test --filesize 1024 --random-threads 4 -s 30
stressapptest -m 8 -i 4 -C 4 -W --cc_test -s 30
stressapptest -m 8 -i 4 -C 4 -W --local_numa -s 30
stressapptest -m 8 -i 4 -C 4 -W -n 127.0.0.1 --listen -s 30
stressapptest -m 12 -i 6 -C 8 -W -f /root/sat-file-test --filesize 1024 --random-threads 4 -n 127.0.0.1 --listen -s 300
As mentioned earlier --- I just could not make it oops doing the
above! (or get any errors in the standalone memtest86+ procedure).
What do you think? Should I just keep on stress-testing it somewhat
indefinitely? Also, please recall that I have two of the identical
machines, and I suffer the same problems with both of them (and they
both pass the above artificial stress-testing).
Thoughts or suggestions, please, for me to explore further...
Thanks again!
> > > [33488.170415] general protection fault: 0000 [#1] SMP
> > > [33488.171351] Modules linked in: dm_crypt dm_mod parport_pc ppdev lp parport bnep rfcomm bluetooth rfkill cpufreq_stats cpufreq_userspace cpufreq_conservative cpufreq_powersave nfsd auth_rpcgss oid_registry nfs_acl nfs lockd fscache sunrpc netconsole configfs loop raid1 md_mod snd_hda_codec_realtek snd_hda_codec_hdmi hid_kensington x86_pkg_temp_thermal coretemp joydev kvm_intel hid_generic kvm crct10dif_pclmul snd_hda_intel crc32_pclmul crc32c_intel snd_hda_codec usbhid snd_hwdep hid ghash_clmulni_intel snd_pcm iTCO_wdt iTCO_vendor_support snd_page_alloc aesni_intel i915 snd_seq aes_x86_64 snd_seq_device snd_timer lrw evdev gf128mul glue_helper drm_kms_helper ablk_helper snd psmouse cryptd drm i2c_i801 pcspkr soundcore serio_raw lpc_ich mei_me mei mfd_core video button processor ext4 crc16 mbcache jbd2 sg sd_mod crc_t10dif crct10dif_common ahci libahci xhci_hcd ehci_pci ehci_hcd e1000e libata igb scsi_mod i2c_algo_bit i2c_core dca ptp pps_core fan usbcore usb_common thermal therma
> > l_sys
> > > [33488.177102] CPU: 0 PID: 340 Comm: jbd2/sdd2-8 Not tainted 3.12-0.bpo.1-amd64 #1 Debian 3.12.9-1~bpo70+1
> > > [33488.178100] Hardware name: Supermicro X10SLQ/X10SLQ, BIOS 1.00 05/09/2013
> > > [33488.179095] task: ffff88081b179080 ti: ffff88081b3ee000 task.ti: ffff88081b3ee000
> > > [33488.180102] RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff811b6b22>] [<ffffffff811b6b22>] __getblk+0x52/0x2c0
> > > [33488.181117] RSP: 0018:ffff88081b3efb78 EFLAGS: 00010282
> > > [33488.182127] RAX: f7ff880037267140 RBX: 0000000000001000 RCX: 0000000000000000
> > > [33488.183142] RDX: 00000000000001ff RSI: 000000000148b2ac RDI: 0000000000000000
> > > [33488.184152] RBP: ffff88081b2a4800 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: ffff8807eccca628
> > > [33488.185168] R10: 00000000000032ad R11: 0000000000000001 R12: 0000000000000000
> > > [33488.186182] R13: ffff88081bcf67c0 R14: 00000000532d22fd R15: 000000000148b2ac
> > > [33488.187194] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff88083fa00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
> > > [33488.188212] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
> > > [33488.189228] CR2: ffffffffff600400 CR3: 000000000180c000 CR4: 00000000001407f0
> > > [33488.190245] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
> > > [33488.191268] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
> > > [33488.192279] Stack:
> > > [33488.193273] 0000000000000000 ffffffffa01ec1ba ffff88081b179080 ffff88081b2a4800
> > > [33488.194276] 00000000000032ac 0000000000000000 ffff88081b2a4800 ffff88081b2a4800
> > > [33488.195265] ffff8807f36b4688 00000000532d22fd 00000000ffffffff ffffffffa01737d0
> > > [33488.196246] Call Trace:
> > > [33488.197222] [<ffffffffa01ec1ba>] ? ext4_bmap+0x5a/0x110 [ext4]
> > > [33488.198210] [<ffffffffa01737d0>] ? jbd2_journal_get_descriptor_buffer+0x30/0x80 [jbd2]
> > > [33488.199203] [<ffffffff811b5100>] ? __wait_on_buffer+0x30/0x30
> > > [33488.200196] [<ffffffffa016aedd>] ? journal_submit_commit_record.isra.12+0x9d/0x200 [jbd2]
> > > [33488.201193] [<ffffffff811b5100>] ? __wait_on_buffer+0x30/0x30
> > > [33488.202198] [<ffffffffa016c1f4>] ? jbd2_journal_commit_transaction+0x11b4/0x18c0 [jbd2]
> > > [33488.203211] [<ffffffffa01706cc>] ? kjournald2+0xac/0x240 [jbd2]
> > > [33488.204219] [<ffffffff81082d20>] ? add_wait_queue+0x60/0x60
> > > [33488.205226] [<ffffffffa0170620>] ? commit_timeout+0x10/0x10 [jbd2]
> > > [33488.206230] [<ffffffff81082333>] ? kthread+0xb3/0xc0
> > > [33488.207230] [<ffffffff81082280>] ? flush_kthread_worker+0xa0/0xa0
> > > [33488.208231] [<ffffffff814cb70c>] ? ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
> > > [33488.209224] [<ffffffff81082280>] ? flush_kthread_worker+0xa0/0xa0
> > > [33488.210205] Code: 12 48 83 c4 28 4c 89 e0 5b 5d 41 5c 41 5d 41 5e 41 5f c3 49 8b 85 98 00 00 00 ba ff 01 00 00 48 8b 80 58 03 00 00 48 85 c0 74 10 <0f> b7 80 ac 05 00 00 66 85 c0 0f 85 cd 01 00 00 85 da 0f 85 d2
> > > [33488.212277] RIP [<ffffffff811b6b22>] __getblk+0x52/0x2c0
> > > [33488.213276] RSP <ffff88081b3efb78>
> > > [33488.370823] ---[ end trace cf90c18d45ff9570 ]---
> > >
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> > >
> > > Ingo, Peter, Thomas, any further ideas, please?
> > >
> > >
> > > > > Though at times the oops occur even when the system is largely idle,
> > > > > they seem to be exacerbated by md5sum'ing all files on a large
> > > > > partition as part of archive verification --- say 1 million files
> > > > > corresponding to 1 TByte of storage. If I perform this repeatedly,
> > > > > the machines seem to lock up about once a week. Strangely, other
> > > > > typical high-load/high-stress scenarios don't seem to provoke the oops
> > > > > nearly so much (see below).
> > > > >
> > > > > Naturally, such md5sum usage is putting heavy load on the processor,
> > > > > memory, and even power supply, and my initial inclination is generally
> > > > > that I must have some faulty components. Even after otherwise
> > > > > ambiguous diagnostics (described below), I'm highly skeptical that
> > > > > there's anything here inherent to the md5sum codebase, in particular.
> > > > > However, I have started to wonder whether this might be a kernel
> > > > > regression...
> > > > >
> > > > > For reference, here's my setup:
> > > > >
> > > > > Mainboard: Supermicro X10SLQ
> > > > > Processor: (Single-Socket) Intel Haswell i7-4770S (65W max TDP)
> > > > > Memory: 32GB Kingston DDR3 RAM (4x KVR16N11/8)
> > > > > PSU: SeaSonic SS-400FL2 400W PSU
> > > > > O/S: Debian v7.4 Wheezy (amd64)
> > > > > Filesystem: Ext4 (with default settings upon creation) over LUKS
> > > > > Kernel: Using both:
> > > > > Linux 3.11.10 ('3.11-0.bpo.2-amd64' via wheezy-backports)
> > > > > Linux 3.12.9 ('3.12-0.bpo.2-amd64' via wheezy-backports)
> > > > >
> > > > > To summarize where I am now: I've been very extensively testing all of
> > > > > the likely culprits among hardware components on both of my servers
> > > > > --- running memtest86 upon boot for 3+ days, memtester in userspace
> > > > > for 24 hours, repeated kernel compiles with various '-j' values, and
> > > > > the 'stress' and 'stressapptest' load generators (see [2] for full
> > > > > details) --- and I have never seen even a hiccup in server operation
> > > > > under such "artificial" environments --- however, it consistently
> > > > > occurs with heavy md5sum operation, and randomly at other times.
> > > > >
> > > > > At least from my past experiences (with scientific HPC clusters), such
> > > > > diagnostic results would normally seem to largely rule out most
> > > > > problems with the processor, memory, mainboard subsystems. The PSU is
> > > > > often a little harder to rule out, but the 400W Seasonic PSUs are
> > > > > rated at 2--3 times the wattage I should really need, even under peak
> > > > > load (given each server's single-socket CPU is 65W at max TDP, there
> > > > > are only a few HDs and one SSD, and no discrete graphics at all, of
> > > > > course).
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm further surprised to see the exact same kernel-crash behavior on
> > > > > two separate, but identical, servers, which leads me to wonder if
> > > > > there's possibly some regression between the hardware (given that it's
> > > > > relatively new Haswell microcode / silicon) and the (kernel?)
> > > > > software.
> > > > >
> > > > > Any thoughts on what might be occurring here? Or what I should focus
> > > > > on? Thanks in advance.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-03-23 14:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-03-18 18:49 Consistent kernel oops with 3.11.10 & 3.12.9 on Haswell CPUs dafreedm
2014-03-19 21:47 ` Guennadi Liakhovetski
2014-03-22 12:37 ` dafreedm
2014-03-22 13:18 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-03-22 13:18 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-03-23 13:25 ` Jan Kara
2014-03-23 13:25 ` Jan Kara
2014-03-23 14:26 ` dafreedm [this message]
2014-03-23 14:26 ` dafreedm
2014-03-27 10:35 ` dafreedm
2014-03-27 15:26 ` Jan Kara
2014-03-27 15:26 ` Jan Kara
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140323142609.GK1817@ofan \
--to=dafreedm@gmail.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=g.liakhovetski@gmx.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.