From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Tue, 19 Jun 2007 20:30:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from larry.melbourne.sgi.com (larry.melbourne.sgi.com [134.14.52.130]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/SuSE Linux 0.7) with SMTP id l5K3U4do024086 for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2007 20:30:05 -0700 Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 13:29:54 +1000 From: David Chinner Subject: Re: BUG: soft lockup detected on CPU#0! Message-ID: <20070620032954.GW86004887@sgi.com> References: <4677E97E.5070802@theendofthetunnel.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4677E97E.5070802@theendofthetunnel.de> Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Hannes Dorbath Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Tue, Jun 19, 2007 at 04:34:38PM +0200, Hannes Dorbath wrote: > I got this on a server box today. Kernel 2.6.21, x86_64, LVM2: > > Jun 19 10:58:16 phoenix Ending XFS recovery on filesystem: dm-5 (logdev: > internal) > Jun 19 10:58:16 phoenix BUG: soft lockup detected on CPU#0! > Jun 19 10:58:16 phoenix > Jun 19 10:58:16 phoenix Call Trace: > Jun 19 10:58:16 phoenix [] > wake_up_process+0x10/0x20 > Jun 19 10:58:16 phoenix [] softlockup_tick+0xe9/0x110 > Jun 19 10:58:16 phoenix [] run_local_timers+0x13/0x20 > Jun 19 10:58:16 phoenix [] update_process_times+0x57/0x90 > Jun 19 10:58:16 phoenix [] > smp_local_timer_interrupt+0x34/0x60 > Jun 19 10:58:16 phoenix [] > smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x4e/0x70 > Jun 19 10:58:16 phoenix [] apic_timer_interrupt+0x66/0x70 > Jun 19 10:58:16 phoenix [] > _spin_unlock_irqrestore+0xc/0x10 > Jun 19 10:58:16 phoenix [] __up_read+0x9b/0xb0 > Jun 19 10:58:16 phoenix [] up_read+0x9/0x10 > Jun 19 10:58:16 phoenix [] xfs_iunlock+0x3d/0xa0 > Jun 19 10:58:16 phoenix [] xfs_rwunlock+0x3a/0x50 > Jun 19 10:58:16 phoenix [] xfs_vm_bmap+0x66/0x90 > Jun 19 10:58:16 phoenix [] bmap+0x1c/0x20 > Jun 19 10:58:16 phoenix [] sys_swapon+0x6ae/0xae0 > Jun 19 10:58:16 phoenix [] system_call+0x7e/0x83 > > What does it tell me? That you've got a fragemented swap file and that sys_swapon() does not yield the CPU in it's main loop that maps the extents in the swap file. Harmless, AFAICT. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner Principal Engineer SGI Australian Software Group