Re: kdump regression compared to v2.6.35

caiqian
2010-08-29T11:41:46Z

----- "Tejun Heo" <tj@kernel.org> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> On 08/29/2010 01:24 PM, CAI Qian wrote:
> >> On 08/29/2010 09:01 AM, caiqian@redhat.com wrote:
> >>> Further bisect indicated this bad commit from the merge. Given kdump
> >>> kernel was running with maxcpus=1, I guess this work caused
> fs/bio.c
> >>> hung in the workqueue on UP. Reverted the whole merge let kdump
> work
> >>> again.
> >>
> >> Can you please pull from the following git tree and see whether it
> >> fixes the problem? There was a bug in nr_active accounting.
> >
> > It had the same problem.
>
> I see. Hmm... a different issue then. Can you please tell me how to
> reproduce the problem?
First, to configure kdump - see Documentation/kdump/kdump.txt. It might be easier if you are using a distro that provide advanced kdump tools. Then, to trigger the kdump - echo c >/proc/sysrq-trigger. In case needed, here is the system information,
# lscpu
Architecture: x86_64
CPU op-mode(s): 32-bit, 64-bit
CPU(s): 64
Thread(s) per core: 2
Core(s) per socket: 8
CPU socket(s): 4
NUMA node(s): 4
Vendor ID: GenuineIntel
CPU family: 6
Model: 46
Stepping: 6
CPU MHz: 1064.000
Virtualization: VT-x
L1d cache: 32K
L1i cache: 32K
L2 cache: 256K
L3 cache: 18432K
NUMA node0 CPU(s): 0,4,8,12,16,20,24,28,32,36,40,44,48,52,56,60
NUMA node1 CPU(s): 1,5,9,13,17,21,25,29,33,37,41,45,49,53,57,61
NUMA node2 CPU(s): 2,6,10,14,18,22,26,30,34,38,42,46,50,54,58,62
NUMA node3 CPU(s): 3,7,11,15,19,23,27,31,35,39,43,47,51,55,59,63

> Thanks.
>
> --
> tejun
>
> _______________________________________________
> kexec mailing list
> kexec@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec