* Instable kernel (2.6.29 or 2.6.31) on MPC8548 with 2 GByte RAM
@ 2009-10-15 10:13 willy jacobs
2009-10-16 17:50 ` Kumar Gala
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: willy jacobs @ 2009-10-15 10:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linuxppc-dev
On our MPC8548 (latest die revision) based boards with 2 GByte DDR2 RAM we see an stable kernel when
CONFIG_HIGHMEM is not set
In this case only the first 768 MB will be used (as reported by /proc/cpuinfo).
Tested with/without the RT-patches for 2.6.29.6(-rt23) and 2.6.31.2(-rt13) kernels.
With CONFIG_HIGHMEM=y (2048 MB reported) we see (under "heavy" load conditions) regulary page
errors like this (with/without RT patches):
BUG: Bad page state in process loadgen pfn:7e31d
page:c17c23a0 flags:80000000 count:0 mapcount:-128 mapping:(null) index:48105
Call Trace:
[ef867d20] [c00072ac] show_stack+0x34/0x160 (unreliable)
[ef867d50] [c006fcd0] bad_page+0x90/0x13c
[ef867d70] [c0070d94] get_page_from_freelist+0x424/0x45c
[ef867de0] [c0070ea4] __alloc_pages_nodemask+0xd8/0x48c
[ef867e40] [c0082bf0] handle_mm_fault+0x404/0x740
[ef867e90] [c00131bc] do_page_fault+0x150/0x460
[ef867f40] [c001017c] handle_page_fault+0xc/0x80
With the RT-patches we see already during Linux startup at lot of these errors (from several processes):
BUG: scheduling while atomic: pam_console_app/0x00000001/802, CPU#0
Modules linked in:
Call Trace:
[ef28dce0] [c00072ac] show_stack+0x34/0x160 (unreliable)
[ef28dd10] [c002fa90] __schedule_bug+0x6c/0x80
[ef28dd30] [c02660fc] __schedule+0x264/0x338
[ef28dd60] [c0266400] schedule+0x1c/0x40
[ef28dd70] [c0267898] rt_spin_lock_slowlock+0x124/0x264
[ef28dde0] [c0079154] __lru_cache_add+0x24/0xa8
[ef28de00] [c008ee04] page_add_new_anon_rmap+0x58/0x88
[ef28de20] [c0086ff8] handle_mm_fault+0x5a4/0x804
[ef28de80] [c0013590] do_page_fault+0x14c/0x49c
[ef28df40] [c00101c4] handle_page_fault+0xc/0x80
BUG: scheduling while atomic: pam_console_app/0x00000001/807, CPU#0
Modules linked in:
Call Trace:
[ef323a30] [c00072ac] show_stack+0x34/0x160 (unreliable)
[ef323a60] [c002fa90] __schedule_bug+0x6c/0x80
[ef323a80] [c02660fc] __schedule+0x264/0x338
[ef323ab0] [c0266400] schedule+0x1c/0x40
[ef323ac0] [c0267898] rt_spin_lock_slowlock+0x124/0x264
[ef323b30] [c0079154] __lru_cache_add+0x24/0xa8
[ef323b50] [c008ee04] page_add_new_anon_rmap+0x58/0x88
[ef323b70] [c0086ff8] handle_mm_fault+0x5a4/0x804
[ef323bd0] [c0013590] do_page_fault+0x14c/0x49c
[ef323c90] [c00101c4] handle_page_fault+0xc/0x80
[ef323d50] [00000007] 0x7
[ef323d80] [c0071320] generic_file_aio_read+0x2d4/0x6bc
[ef323e00] [c00ffe98] nfs_file_read+0x124/0x178
[ef323e30] [c009d56c] do_sync_read+0xc4/0x138
[ef323ef0] [c009e0a4] vfs_read+0xc4/0x188
[ef323f10] [c009e514] sys_read+0x4c/0x90
[ef323f40] [c000fd84] ret_from_syscall+0x0/0x3c
Anyone experience with MPC8548 with 2 GByte RAM (HIGHMEM)?
Regards,
--
willy
Unclassified
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer:
If you are not the intended recipient of this email, please notify the sender and delete it.
Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of this email or its attachment(s) is forbidden.
Thales Nederland BV will not accept liability for any damage caused by this email or its attachment(s).
Thales Nederland BV is seated in Hengelo and is registered at the Chamber of Commerce under number 06061578.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: Instable kernel (2.6.29 or 2.6.31) on MPC8548 with 2 GByte RAM
2009-10-15 10:13 Instable kernel (2.6.29 or 2.6.31) on MPC8548 with 2 GByte RAM willy jacobs
@ 2009-10-16 17:50 ` Kumar Gala
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Kumar Gala @ 2009-10-16 17:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: willy jacobs; +Cc: Linuxppc-dev
On Oct 15, 2009, at 5:13 AM, willy jacobs wrote:
> On our MPC8548 (latest die revision) based boards with 2 GByte DDR2
> RAM we see an stable kernel when
>
> CONFIG_HIGHMEM is not set
>
> In this case only the first 768 MB will be used (as reported by /
> proc/cpuinfo).
> Tested with/without the RT-patches for 2.6.29.6(-rt23) and 2.6.31.2(-
> rt13) kernels.
>
> With CONFIG_HIGHMEM=y (2048 MB reported) we see (under "heavy" load
> conditions) regulary page
> errors like this (with/without RT patches):
>
> BUG: Bad page state in process loadgen pfn:7e31d
> page:c17c23a0 flags:80000000 count:0 mapcount:-128 mapping:(null)
> index:48105
> Call Trace:
> [ef867d20] [c00072ac] show_stack+0x34/0x160 (unreliable)
> [ef867d50] [c006fcd0] bad_page+0x90/0x13c
> [ef867d70] [c0070d94] get_page_from_freelist+0x424/0x45c
> [ef867de0] [c0070ea4] __alloc_pages_nodemask+0xd8/0x48c
> [ef867e40] [c0082bf0] handle_mm_fault+0x404/0x740
> [ef867e90] [c00131bc] do_page_fault+0x150/0x460
> [ef867f40] [c001017c] handle_page_fault+0xc/0x80
>
> With the RT-patches we see already during Linux startup at lot of
> these errors (from several processes):
>
> BUG: scheduling while atomic: pam_console_app/0x00000001/802, CPU#0
> Modules linked in:
> Call Trace:
> [ef28dce0] [c00072ac] show_stack+0x34/0x160 (unreliable)
> [ef28dd10] [c002fa90] __schedule_bug+0x6c/0x80
> [ef28dd30] [c02660fc] __schedule+0x264/0x338
> [ef28dd60] [c0266400] schedule+0x1c/0x40
> [ef28dd70] [c0267898] rt_spin_lock_slowlock+0x124/0x264
> [ef28dde0] [c0079154] __lru_cache_add+0x24/0xa8
> [ef28de00] [c008ee04] page_add_new_anon_rmap+0x58/0x88
> [ef28de20] [c0086ff8] handle_mm_fault+0x5a4/0x804
> [ef28de80] [c0013590] do_page_fault+0x14c/0x49c
> [ef28df40] [c00101c4] handle_page_fault+0xc/0x80
> BUG: scheduling while atomic: pam_console_app/0x00000001/807, CPU#0
> Modules linked in:
> Call Trace:
> [ef323a30] [c00072ac] show_stack+0x34/0x160 (unreliable)
> [ef323a60] [c002fa90] __schedule_bug+0x6c/0x80
> [ef323a80] [c02660fc] __schedule+0x264/0x338
> [ef323ab0] [c0266400] schedule+0x1c/0x40
> [ef323ac0] [c0267898] rt_spin_lock_slowlock+0x124/0x264
> [ef323b30] [c0079154] __lru_cache_add+0x24/0xa8
> [ef323b50] [c008ee04] page_add_new_anon_rmap+0x58/0x88
> [ef323b70] [c0086ff8] handle_mm_fault+0x5a4/0x804
> [ef323bd0] [c0013590] do_page_fault+0x14c/0x49c
> [ef323c90] [c00101c4] handle_page_fault+0xc/0x80
> [ef323d50] [00000007] 0x7
> [ef323d80] [c0071320] generic_file_aio_read+0x2d4/0x6bc
> [ef323e00] [c00ffe98] nfs_file_read+0x124/0x178
> [ef323e30] [c009d56c] do_sync_read+0xc4/0x138
> [ef323ef0] [c009e0a4] vfs_read+0xc4/0x188
> [ef323f10] [c009e514] sys_read+0x4c/0x90
> [ef323f40] [c000fd84] ret_from_syscall+0x0/0x3c
>
> Anyone experience with MPC8548 with 2 GByte RAM (HIGHMEM)?
>
We've used MPC85xx w/2G+ for some time w/HIGHMEM and havent seen any
issues. Are you sure your DDR settings are stable?
- k
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-10-16 17:50 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-10-15 10:13 Instable kernel (2.6.29 or 2.6.31) on MPC8548 with 2 GByte RAM willy jacobs
2009-10-16 17:50 ` Kumar Gala
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.