Re: strange stuff in dmesg

["Justin P. Mattock" <justinmattock@gmail.com>]

On 12/24/09 09:34, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 22:22:41 +0700 BuraphaLinux Server wrote:
>
>> On 12/24/09, Justin P. Mattock<justinmattock@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>> On 12/24/09 02:03, BuraphaLinux Server wrote:
>>>> On my Dell OptiPlex 330 machines with kernel 2.6.32.2 I get a strange
>>>> WARNING.  Do I need to worry?  Here is the warning:
>>>>
>>>> [    0.000000] ------------[ cut here ]------------
>>>> [    0.000000] WARNING: at mm/page_alloc.c:1805
>>>> __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x1b6/0x730()
>>>> [    0.000000] Hardware name: OptiPlex 330
>>>> [    0.000000] Modules linked in:
>>>> [    0.000000] Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.32.2 #1
>>>> [    0.000000] Call Trace:
>>>> [    0.000000]  [<ffffffff8108e806>] ? __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x1b6/0x730
>>>> [    0.000000]  [<ffffffff81043f68>] warn_slowpath_common+0x78/0xd0
>>>> [    0.000000]  [<ffffffff81043fcf>] warn_slowpath_null+0xf/0x20
>>>> [    0.000000]  [<ffffffff8108e806>] __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x1b6/0x730
>>>> [    0.000000]  [<ffffffff810b4e28>] alloc_pages_current+0x78/0xf0
>>>> [    0.000000]  [<ffffffff8108da69>] __get_free_pages+0x9/0x50
>>>> [    0.000000]  [<ffffffff810bb912>] __kmalloc+0x112/0x120
>>>> [    0.000000]  [<ffffffff8146e773>] vgacon_scrollback_startup+0x13/0x70
>>>> [    0.000000]  [<ffffffff811d29b3>] vgacon_startup+0x2a3/0x420
>>>> [    0.000000]  [<ffffffff816fc556>] con_init+0x1b/0x230
>>>> [    0.000000]  [<ffffffff816fba00>] console_init+0x22/0x42
>>>> [    0.000000]  [<ffffffff816d4b8f>] start_kernel+0x240/0x3be
>>>> [    0.000000]  [<ffffffff816d4289>] x86_64_start_reservations+0x99/0xb9
>>>> [    0.000000]  [<ffffffff816d4389>] x86_64_start_kernel+0xe0/0xf2
>>>> [    0.000000] ---[ end trace 4eaa2a86a8e2da22 ]---
>>>>
>>>> I also got it on 2.6.31.9, but had waited to ask hoping 2.6.32.2 would fix
>>>> it.
>>>>
>>>> Attached is my config
>>>>
>>> was there a kernel that did not do this?
>>> if so can you try a bisect on this?
>>>
>>> Justin P. Mattock
>>>
>>
>> It took a while, but I have verified that 2.6.30.10 works without any
>> message, and 2.6.31 has the error message (but otherwise seems to run
>> ok).  The hex codes are different, but the function names match and
>> are in the same places.
>>
>> Does it have to be git bisect, or will trying the 2.6.31rc[1-9] be
>> enough instead?  The Documentation/BUG-HUNTING does not give detailed
>> enough instructions for me to do the bisect thing.
>
> "git bisect" can point directly at the kernel patch that causes the
> problem (well, most of the time it can do that), whereas just saying
> 2.6.31-rc[1-9] will just tell us that it was one of a few thousand
> patches.  Not nearly as helpful.
>
> Maybe this can help you:
> http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git-core/docs/git-bisect-lk2009.html
>
>
> ---
> ~Randy
>


yeah a bisect hopefully
points to the right location

if you need info I can try and assist you as much as
possible, and well as anybody else.

Justin P. Mattock