From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: by oss.sgi.com id ; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 22:52:10 -0700 Received: from hermes.research.kpn.com ([139.63.192.8]:50952 "EHLO hermes.research.kpn.com") by oss.sgi.com with ESMTP id ; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 22:51:46 -0700 Received: from sparta.research.kpn.com (sparta.research.kpn.com [139.63.192.6]) by research.kpn.com (PMDF V5.2-31 #42699) with ESMTP id <01JVPHWIC5S0000S9V@research.kpn.com>; Tue, 24 Oct 2000 07:51:44 +0200 Received: from sparta.research.kpn.com (sparta.research.kpn.com [139.63.192.6]) by sparta.research.kpn.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id HAA02069; Tue, 24 Oct 2000 07:51:43 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 07:51:42 +0200 From: "Houten K.H.C. van (Karel)" X-Face: ";:TzQQC{mTp~$W,'m4@Lu1Lu$rtG_~5kvYO~F:C'KExk9o1X"iRz[0%{bq?6Aj#>VhSD?v 1W9`.Qsf+P&*iQEL8&y,RDj&U.]!(R-?c-h5h%Iw%r$|%6+Jc>GTJe!_1&A0o'lC[`I#={2BzOXT1P q366I$WL=;[+SDo1RoIT+a}_y68Y:jQ^xp4=*4-ryiymi>hy Subject: Re: process lockups In-reply-to: "Your message of Tue, 24 Oct 2000 04:47:36 +0200." <20001024044736.B3397@bacchus.dhis.org> To: Ralf Baechle Cc: linux-mips@fnet.fr, linux-mips@oss.sgi.com, K.H.C.vanHouten@research.kpn.com Reply-to: K.H.C.vanHouten@kpn.com Message-id: <200010240551.HAA02069@sparta.research.kpn.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.5 12/11/95 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Precedence: bulk Return-Path: X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips-outgoing Ralf Baechle wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 03:22:32AM +0200, Karsten Merker wrote: > > > I am running Kernel 2.4.0-test9 on a DECstation 5000/150. I am > > experiencing a strange behaviour when having strong I/O-load, such as > > running a "tar xvf foobar.tgz" with a large archive. After some time of > > activity the process (in this case tar) is stuck in status "D". There is > > neither an entry in the syslog nor on the console that would give me a > > hint what is happening. Is anyone else experiencing this? > > I observe similar stuck processes on Origins - even without massive I/O > load. I'm trying to track them but little success aside of fixing a few > unrelated little bugs. Do you observe those on your R4k box also? On my DEC 5000/260 (R4k) I have no stuck processes, but I should mention that I am running without swap (I have 192Mb RAM). > Another things which I'm observing is that I occasinally can't unmount > a filesystem. umount then says the fs is still in use. Sometimes it's > at least possible to remount the fs r/o. Have you also observed this one? Yes, but only the root FS. I thought I might have to upgrade to a newer mount program for the 2.4 kernel, or is the system call returning the error? > > Another thing I see on my 5000/150 (and only there - this is my only > > R4K-machine, so I do not know whether this is CPU- or machine-type-bound) > > is "top" going weird, eating lots of CPU cycles and spitting messages > > "schedule_timeout: wrong timeout value fffbd0b2 from 800900f8; Setting > > flush to zero for top". I know Florian also has this on his 5000/150. > > Anyone else with the same behavoiur or any idea about the cause for this? > > Setting flush to zero for means that the floating point > approximator is now enabled ;-) > > The schedule_timeout thing is unrelated; I've never heared of it before. Aside from this I stil get 'bug in get_wchan' messages, but everything seems to run fine. I hope to test my current kernels on a 5000/150 and a 3100. Regards, -- Karel van Houten ---------------------------------------------------------- The box said "Requires Windows 95 or better." I can't understand why it won't work on my Linux computer. ----------------------------------------------------------