From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33E0B29DF8 for ; Mon, 6 May 2013 07:47:55 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by relay1.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 223948F8033 for ; Mon, 6 May 2013 05:47:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgw1.uni-kl.de (mailgw1.uni-kl.de [131.246.120.220]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id j6vzHhObFzGeD9JE (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 06 May 2013 05:47:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from itwm2.itwm.fhg.de (itwm2.itwm.fhg.de [131.246.191.3]) by mailgw1.uni-kl.de (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.4) with ESMTP id r46ClVlp026414 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 6 May 2013 14:47:31 +0200 Message-ID: <5187A663.707@itwm.fraunhofer.de> Date: Mon, 06 May 2013 14:47:31 +0200 From: Bernd Schubert MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: 3.9.0: general protection fault References: <20130506122844.GL19978@dastard> In-Reply-To: <20130506122844.GL19978@dastard> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Dave Chinner Cc: linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com On 05/06/2013 02:28 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 10:14:22AM +0200, Bernd Schubert wrote: >> And anpther protection fault, this time with 3.9.0. Always happens >> on one of the servers. Its ECC memory, so I don't suspect a faulty >> memory bank. Going to fsck now- > > http://xfs.org/index.php/XFS_FAQ#Q:_What_information_should_I_include_when_reporting_a_problem.3F Isn't that a bit overhead? And I can't provide /proc/meminfo and others, as this issue causes a kernel panic a few traces later. > >> >>> [303340.514052] general protection fault: 0000 [#1] SMP DEBUG_PAGEALLOC >>> [303340.517913] Modules linked in: fhgfs(O) fhgfs_client_opentk(O) > > Kernel tainted with out of tree modules. Can you reproduce the > problem with them? The modules are unused, as this is the server side. I disabled client packages now and will re-run. But I really think that we should look for memory/list corruption outside of fhgfs. Also very unlikely that always only xfs would suffer, as there is also running ext4 for fhgfs meta data. Also, it took from Friday evening till this morning to run into the crash, so the next occurance might take some time. And I think tracing xfs is out of question, as I need the disk space to store data (the client side is running our stress test suite). Cheers, Bernd _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs