test12 lockups -- need feedback

test12 lockups -- need feedback

[Mohammad A. Haque]

At first I thought it was just me when I reported the lockups I was
having with test12 earlier this week. Now the reports are flooding. Of
course, now my machine isn't locking up anymore after recompiling from a
clean source tree (test5 w/ patches through test12)

Now, I'm trying to determine what the common element is.

Those of you who are having lockups, was test12 compiled from a patched
tree that you've previously compiled?

Those that are locking up in X. Do you have a second machine you can
hook up via serial port to grab Oops output?

I've got KDB compiled in my current kernel. I'll compile a fresh kernel
without KDB and see how long I last when I get a chance.
-- 

=====================================================================
Mohammad A. Haque                              http://www.haque.net/ 
                                               mhaque@haque.net

  "Alcohol and calculus don't mix.             Project Lead
   Don't drink and derive." --Unknown          http://wm.themes.org/
                                               batmanppc@themes.org
=====================================================================
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: test12 lockups -- need feedback

[Mikael Djurfeldt]

"Mohammad A. Haque" <mhaque@haque.net> writes:

> Those of you who are having lockups, was test12 compiled from a patched
> tree that you've previously compiled?

I downloaded the full test12 and have lockups after using X (upstream
version 4.0.1Z) 15-45 mins.  For me, SysRq+u works, but if I then
press SysRq+b, nothing happens.  There are no signs in the syslog.

I'm using the latest Debian packages from the Woody release on an
Mobile Pentium II, 333 MHz, 160 Mb ram.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: test12 lockups -- need feedback

[Mikael Djurfeldt]

Mikael Djurfeldt <mdj@mdj.nada.kth.se> writes:

> "Mohammad A. Haque" <mhaque@haque.net> writes:
> 
> > Those of you who are having lockups, was test12 compiled from a patched
> > tree that you've previously compiled?
> 
> I downloaded the full test12 and have lockups after using X (upstream
> version 4.0.1Z) 15-45 mins.  For me, SysRq+u works, but if I then
> press SysRq+b, nothing happens.  There are no signs in the syslog.

I should add that I didn't have these lockups in test12-pre8.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: test12 lockups -- need feedback

[dep]

On Wednesday 13 December 2000 19:29, Mikael Djurfeldt wrote:

| > I downloaded the full test12 and have lockups after using X
| > (upstream version 4.0.1Z) 15-45 mins.  For me, SysRq+u works, but
| > if I then press SysRq+b, nothing happens.  There are no signs in
| > the syslog.
|
| I should add that I didn't have these lockups in test12-pre8.

just for statistical purposes, test12 has been running problem-free 
here on a k6-2-550 (running at 500), glibc-2.2, built with 
gcc-2.95-2, since about an hour after it was announced. no anomalies 
at all, and the cd reader has become reliable again. in X the entire 
time, and heavy system activity with a wide variety of applications.
-- 
dep
--
bipartisanship: an illogical construct not unlike the idea that
if half the people like red and half the people like blue, the 
country's favorite color is purple.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: test12 lockups -- need feedback

[Mohammad A. Haque]

Ok, got locked up. Dropped me into kdb and I was able to write down the
oops after doing a ss on btp 0.

I'll try to have something posted in an hour.

On Wed, 13 Dec 2000, Mohammad A. Haque wrote:

> At first I thought it was just me when I reported the lockups I was
> having with test12 earlier this week. Now the reports are flooding. Of
> course, now my machine isn't locking up anymore after recompiling from a
> clean source tree (test5 w/ patches through test12)
>
> Now, I'm trying to determine what the common element is.
>
> Those of you who are having lockups, was test12 compiled from a patched
> tree that you've previously compiled?
>
> Those that are locking up in X. Do you have a second machine you can
> hook up via serial port to grab Oops output?
>
> I've got KDB compiled in my current kernel. I'll compile a fresh kernel
> without KDB and see how long I last when I get a chance.
>

-- 

=====================================================================
Mohammad A. Haque                              http://www.haque.net/
                                               mhaque@haque.net

  "Alcohol and calculus don't mix.             Project Lead
   Don't drink and derive." --Unknown          http://wm.themes.org/
                                               batmanppc@themes.org
=====================================================================

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: test12 lockups -- need feedback

[Mohammad A. Haque]

Here we go folks. I hope I got everything right. The only place I have a
doubt is the 0010: part of EIP. I couldn't read what I wrote there.
Looks like it's ip fragment related?

ksymoops 0.7c on i686 2.4.0-test11.  Options used
     -V (default)
     -K (specified)
     -L (specified)
     -o /lib/modules/2.4.0-test12 (specified)
     -m /usr/src/linux/System.map (default)

No modules in ksyms, skipping objects
invalid operand: 0000
CPU:    0
EIP:    0010:[<c01e610e>]
Using defaults from ksymoops -t elf32-i386 -a i386
EFLAGS: 00010246
eax: 00000000   ebx: d15c83e0   ecx: d1f4aa60   edx: d1f4aa60
esi: 000003d8   edi: d15c8660   ebp: 000003d8   esp: c0303c1c
ds: 0018   es: 0018   ss: 0018
Process swapper (pid: 0, stackpage=c0303000)
Stack: d1f4aa60 00000000 0000625b d957accf 00000014 00000000 c01e6493 d1f4aa60
       d15c8660 d3fc9680 d15c8660 00000008 c0303d28 011e51be 00000000 d58ce1bf
       d15c8660 d58d0008 c0303018 00000003 d58cd3ed d15c8660 d58d0d08 c0303018
Call Trace: [<d957accf>] [<c01e6493>] [<d58ce1bf>] [<d5800008>] [<d58cd3ed>] [<d5800008>] [<c012e146>]
       [<d58cf370>] [<c01e88a4>] [<c01d925c>] [<c01e88a4>] [<c01e88a4>] [<c01d94b7>] [<c01e88a4>] [<d58d0d08>]
       [<c01e7faf>] [<c01e88a4>] [<c01fdf2c>] [<c01e80be>] [<c01fdf2c>] [<c01fe122>] [<c01fdf2c>] [<d957accf>]
       [<d957accf>] [<c01fe64b>] [<d58cc945>] [<d58d0d38>] [<d58cf2bf>] [<c01fe89a>] [<c01e59f3>] [<c01e5a68>]
       [<c01d94fa>] [<c01e5845>] [<c01e5970>] [<c01e5c0f>] [<c01e5a68>] [<c01d94fa>] [<c01e593d>] [<c01e5a68>]
       [<c01dce3d>] [<c011ef4f>] [<c010c891>] [<c0109420>] [<c0109420>] [<c010b128>] [<c0109420>] [<c0109420>]
       [<c0100018>] [<c0109443>] [<c01094a9>] [<c0105000>] [<c0100191>]
Code: 8b 40 3c 89 41 3c 8b 47 5c c7 47 18 00 00 00 00 01 41 18 8b

>>EIP; c01e610e <ip_frag_queue+20a/254>   <=====
Trace; d957accf <END_OF_CODE+19209c2b/????>
Trace; c01e6493 <ip_defrag+b3/130>
Trace; d58ce1bf <END_OF_CODE+1555d11b/????>
Trace; d5800008 <END_OF_CODE+1548ef64/????>
Trace; d58cd3ed <END_OF_CODE+1555c349/????>
Trace; d5800008 <END_OF_CODE+1548ef64/????>
Trace; c012e146 <__alloc_pages+de/2d0>
Trace; d58cf370 <END_OF_CODE+1555e2cc/????>
Trace; c01e88a4 <output_maybe_reroute+0/14>
Trace; c01d925c <nf_iterate+30/8c>
Trace; c01e88a4 <output_maybe_reroute+0/14>
Trace; c01e88a4 <output_maybe_reroute+0/14>
Trace; c01d94b7 <nf_hook_slow+7f/100>
Trace; c01e88a4 <output_maybe_reroute+0/14>
Trace; d58d0d08 <END_OF_CODE+1555fc64/????>
Trace; c01e7faf <ip_build_xmit_slow+3b7/478>
Trace; c01e88a4 <output_maybe_reroute+0/14>
Trace; c01fdf2c <icmp_glue_bits+0/88>
Trace; c01e80be <ip_build_xmit+4e/2fc>
Trace; c01fdf2c <icmp_glue_bits+0/88>
Trace; c01fe122 <icmp_reply+16e/18c>
Trace; c01fdf2c <icmp_glue_bits+0/88>
Trace; d957accf <END_OF_CODE+19209c2b/????>
Trace; d957accf <END_OF_CODE+19209c2b/????>
Trace; c01fe64b <icmp_echo+3f/48>
Trace; d58cc945 <END_OF_CODE+1555b8a1/????>
Trace; d58d0d38 <END_OF_CODE+1555fc94/????>
Trace; d58cf2bf <END_OF_CODE+1555e21b/????>
Trace; c01fe89a <icmp_rcv+9a/d0>
Trace; c01e59f3 <ip_local_deliver_finish+83/f8>
Trace; c01e5a68 <ip_rcv_finish+0/1d8>
Trace; c01d94fa <nf_hook_slow+c2/100>
Trace; c01e5845 <ip_local_deliver+39/40>
Trace; c01e5970 <ip_local_deliver_finish+0/f8>
Trace; c01e5c0f <ip_rcv_finish+1a7/1d8>
Trace; c01e5a68 <ip_rcv_finish+0/1d8>
Trace; c01d94fa <nf_hook_slow+c2/100>
Trace; c01e593d <ip_rcv+f1/124>
Trace; c01e5a68 <ip_rcv_finish+0/1d8>
Trace; c01dce3d <net_rx_action+19d/278>
Trace; c011ef4f <do_softirq+3f/64>
Trace; c010c891 <do_IRQ+a1/b0>
Trace; c0109420 <default_idle+0/28>
Trace; c0109420 <default_idle+0/28>
Trace; c010b128 <ret_from_intr+0/20>
Trace; c0109420 <default_idle+0/28>
Trace; c0109420 <default_idle+0/28>
Trace; c0100018 <startup_32+18/139>
Trace; c0109443 <default_idle+23/28>
Trace; c01094a9 <cpu_idle+41/54>
Trace; c0105000 <empty_bad_page+0/1000>
Trace; c0100191 <L6+0/2>
Code;  c01e610e <ip_frag_queue+20a/254>
00000000 <_EIP>:
Code;  c01e610e <ip_frag_queue+20a/254>   <=====
   0:   8b 40 3c                  mov    0x3c(%eax),%eax   <=====
Code;  c01e6111 <ip_frag_queue+20d/254>
   3:   89 41 3c                  mov    %eax,0x3c(%ecx)
Code;  c01e6114 <ip_frag_queue+210/254>
   6:   8b 47 5c                  mov    0x5c(%edi),%eax
Code;  c01e6117 <ip_frag_queue+213/254>
   9:   c7 47 18 00 00 00 00      movl   $0x0,0x18(%edi)
Code;  c01e611e <ip_frag_queue+21a/254>
  10:   01 41 18                  add    %eax,0x18(%ecx)
Code;  c01e6121 <ip_frag_queue+21d/254>
  13:   8b 00                     mov    (%eax),%eax



On Wed, 13 Dec 2000, Mohammad A. Haque wrote:

> Ok, got locked up. Dropped me into kdb and I was able to write down the
> oops after doing a ss on btp 0.
>
> I'll try to have something posted in an hour.
>

-- 

=====================================================================
Mohammad A. Haque                              http://www.haque.net/
                                               mhaque@haque.net

  "Alcohol and calculus don't mix.             Project Lead
   Don't drink and derive." --Unknown          http://wm.themes.org/
                                               batmanppc@themes.org
=====================================================================

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: test12 lockups -- need feedback

[Martin Bahlinger]

In article <3A3804CA.E07FDBB1@haque.net> you wrote:
> At first I thought it was just me when I reported the lockups I was
> having with test12 earlier this week. Now the reports are flooding. Of
> course, now my machine isn't locking up anymore after recompiling from a
> clean source tree (test5 w/ patches through test12)

> Now, I'm trying to determine what the common element is.

> Those of you who are having lockups, was test12 compiled from a patched
> tree that you've previously compiled?

I compiled from a clean source tree test7 with patches through test12.
My machine gets locked up directly after starting the xfree-3.3.6 mach64
server. I'm running Debian2.3 woody here on a P90 w/ 32MB Ram.

> Those that are locking up in X. Do you have a second machine you can
> hook up via serial port to grab Oops output?

If it's still necessary, contact me via email.

-- 
Martin.Bahlinger@rz.uni-karlsruhe.de   (PGP-ID: 0x0506D9B7)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: test12 lockups -- need feedback

[Mohammad A. Haque]

Hmmm, does syslog sending to another machine catch oops? I guess we'll
find out.

Ingo Oeser wrote:
> I have no oops yet of this lockup, because of X, but I'll ask a
> friend of mine, whether the remote logging made it to him and
> send you the results.

-- 

=====================================================================
Mohammad A. Haque                              http://www.haque.net/ 
                                               mhaque@haque.net

  "Alcohol and calculus don't mix.             Project Lead
   Don't drink and derive." --Unknown          http://wm.themes.org/
                                               batmanppc@themes.org
=====================================================================
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: test12 lockups -- need feedback

[dep]

okay. got it here this morning, too. solid lock -- no dumping out of 
x, no changing terminals, no mouse, no keyboard.

k6-2-550 @ 500; 256mb memory, fic 503a mb with via chipset. kernel 
built with gcc-2.95-2 against glibc-2.2. nothing remarkable underway 
-- was composing a message in kmail, which i've done successfully 
multiple times since upgrading to test12.
-- 
dep
--
bipartisanship: an illogical construct not unlike the idea that
if half the people like red and half the people like blue, the 
country's favorite color is purple.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: test12 lockups -- need feedback

[Mohammad A. Haque]

Were you connected to a network or receiving/sending anything?

dep wrote:
> 
> okay. got it here this morning, too. solid lock -- no dumping out of
> x, no changing terminals, no mouse, no keyboard.
> 
> k6-2-550 @ 500; 256mb memory, fic 503a mb with via chipset. kernel
> built with gcc-2.95-2 against glibc-2.2. nothing remarkable underway
> -- was composing a message in kmail, which i've done successfully
> multiple times since upgrading to test12.
> --
> dep

-- 

=====================================================================
Mohammad A. Haque                              http://www.haque.net/ 
                                               mhaque@haque.net

  "Alcohol and calculus don't mix.             Project Lead
   Don't drink and derive." --Unknown          http://wm.themes.org/
                                               batmanppc@themes.org
=====================================================================
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: test12 lockups -- need feedback

[Ingo Oeser]

On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 10:48:56PM -0500, Mohammad A. Haque wrote:
> Trace; c0105000 <empty_bad_page+0/1000>
> Trace; c0100191 <L6+0/2>

I locked a Cyrix III machine up on boot and hat these both
elements in my trace, too.

It Oopsed and locked up after the Message: "CPU: Before vendor
init".

I locked up too with another machine (Pentium Classic) but like
all others by using X.

I have no oops yet of this lockup, because of X, but I'll ask a
friend of mine, whether the remote logging made it to him and
send you the results.

PS: I tried test12-pre8, so its inside test12-pre8 already.

Regards

Ingo Oeser
-- 
10.+11.03.2001 - 3. Chemnitzer LinuxTag <http://www.tu-chemnitz.de/linux/tag>
         <<<<<<<<<<<<       come and join the fun       >>>>>>>>>>>>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: test12 lockups -- need feedback

[dep]

On Thursday 14 December 2000 07:15, Mohammad A. Haque wrote:
| Were you connected to a network or receiving/sending anything?

a conditional yes -- little lan here, d-link dfe-530tx+ (rtl8139) to 
dlink hub, di-701 gateway, cable modem. so far as i know, i was 
neither sending nor receiving at the time, and i've done both things 
extensively with test12 without a lockup.

-- 
dep
--
bipartisanship: an illogical construct not unlike the idea that
if half the people like red and half the people like blue, the 
country's favorite color is purple.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: test12 lockups -- need feedback

[Bob_Tracy]

Mohammad A. Haque wrote:
> Were you connected to a network or receiving/sending anything?
> 
> dep wrote:
> > 
> > okay. got it here this morning, too. solid lock -- no dumping out of
> > x, no changing terminals, no mouse, no keyboard.
> > 
> > k6-2-550 @ 500; 256mb memory, fic 503a mb with via chipset.

This one is going to be fun to track down.  So far, with a personal
sample size of three machines, 2.4.0-test12 is stable on two, locks
up in a predictable and repeatable manner on one.  First, the stable
machines:

(1) P150 MMX Toshiba Tecra 730XCDT notebook, egcs-2.91.66, openwin
    with XFree86 3.3.6.

(2) Cyrix 6x86 MII 233, egcs-2.91.66, AfterStep with XFree86 4.0.1,
    NVIDIA-0.9-5 video driver.

The unstable machine:

Gateway PII 333, egcs-2.91.66, AfterStep with XFree86 3.3.6.
Running "startx" as "root" --> ok: no problem.
Running "startx" as normal user --> I get as far as the grey moire
pattern with the black "X" cursor in the center of the screen, and
the machine locks up solid.  Cannot switch consoles, machine doesn't
respond to pings (much less remote access attempts), no disk activity,
no "oops" messages in any of the logfiles.  Absolutely repeatable.
Machine works fine with earlier kernels.

Does anyone have a feeling one way or the other as far as this being
related to the CPU type?  I can try building a pre-PII CPU kernel on
the unstable machine and see if that makes any difference.

-- 
Bob Tracy                                            rct@frus.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------
 "We might not be in hell, but we can see the gates from here."
 --Phoenix resident, Summer of 2000
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: test12 lockups -- need feedback

[Eckhard Jokisch]

Subject: Re: test12 lockups -- need feedback
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 15:31:38 +0000
From: Eckhard Jokisch <e.jokisch@u-code.de>
To: dep <dennispowell@earthlink.net>


On Don, 14 Dez 2000, dep wrote:
> On Thursday 14 December 2000 07:15, Mohammad A. Haque wrote:
> | Were you connected to a network or receiving/sending anything?
>
> a conditional yes -- little lan here, d-link dfe-530tx+ (rtl8139) to
> dlink hub, di-701 gateway, cable modem. so far as i know, i was
> neither sending nor receiving at the time, and i've done both things
> extensively with test12 without a lockup.

Is it possible that there is something wrong with the 8139too driver? 
( I also use a card with 8139 chip )
Or do you use the "old" rtl8139 ? With that I don't have any problems.
I have an extra machine here where I can do all testing - how can I help?

Eckhard

-------------------------------------------------------
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: test12 lockups -- need feedback

[Ingo Oeser]

On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 06:42:58AM -0500, Mohammad A. Haque wrote:
> Hmmm, does syslog sending to another machine catch oops? I guess we'll
> find out.

No, I asked for the logs and he didn't receive any of them :-(

Regards

Ingo Oeser
-- 
10.+11.03.2001 - 3. Chemnitzer LinuxTag <http://www.tu-chemnitz.de/linux/tag>
         <<<<<<<<<<<<       come and join the fun       >>>>>>>>>>>>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: test12 lockups -- need feedback

[H. Peter Anvin]

> 
> I have no Realtek-Card and have the same lockup.
> 
> I also got a hard lockup (but with Oops) while calling the
> "vendor CPU init" function during system boot.
> 
> This was on Cyrix III.
> 
> PS: CC'ed hpa, because he is cpu-detection maintainer and davej,
>    because he added Cyrix III support and might know details ;-)
> 

Please include the oops information, as well as the /proc/cpuinfo output.

    -hpa


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: test12 lockups -- need feedback

[Alan Cox]

> > I also got a hard lockup (but with Oops) while calling the
> > "vendor CPU init" function during system boot.
> > 
> > This was on Cyrix III.
> > PS: CC'ed hpa, because he is cpu-detection maintainer and davej,
> >    because he added Cyrix III support and might know details ;-)
> 
> Please include the oops information, as well as the /proc/cpuinfo output.

Also be sure you built Pentium/TSC kernels as Cyrix III is a 686 core without
the cmov instruction it seems

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: test12 lockups -- need feedback

[Ingo Oeser]

On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 06:52:34PM +0000, Eckhard Jokisch wrote:
> Is it possible that there is something wrong with the 8139too driver? 
> ( I also use a card with 8139 chip )
> Or do you use the "old" rtl8139 ? With that I don't have any problems.
> I have an extra machine here where I can do all testing - how can I help?

I have no Realtek-Card and have the same lockup.

I also got a hard lockup (but with Oops) while calling the
"vendor CPU init" function during system boot.

This was on Cyrix III.

PS: CC'ed hpa, because he is cpu-detection maintainer and davej,
   because he added Cyrix III support and might know details ;-)

Regards

Ingo Oeser
-- 
10.+11.03.2001 - 3. Chemnitzer LinuxTag <http://www.tu-chemnitz.de/linux/tag>
         <<<<<<<<<<<<       come and join the fun       >>>>>>>>>>>>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: test12 lockups -- need feedback

[mike]

I have a DLink DFE-530TX+ with a RTL8139 and I lock up cold
every once in a while too.  2.4.0-test12-pre3 is the latest
kernel I've tried.  The machine is a dual PII450 on a Tyan
Tiger 100 BX board w/ 128MB.

Locks up cold meaning "It's dead Jim".  Non sysrq facilities
available and no Oops trail.

I don't see the old Becker 8139 driver in the 2.4 tree so
I don't know if it happens with 2.4 and the old driver.

I can provide what ever info that is available and would
be useful.

NOTE also: I have an old Dell P133 48MB masquerading machine 
with 2 of these same boards that Panic's on current 2.4 
kernels with the "Aieee killing interrupt handler" message
to the console but doesn't get around to writing the console
to the log before going toe up.  2.4.0-test12-pre3.  Before
that I get a bunch of the RxFIFOOwv interrupt sending it
into the rtl8139_weird_interrupt routine, but it says
in the driver code that this could be related to CPU speed
and the machine's a P133.  Should the machine panic though?

I can't get the console off to the serial port cause the
ports are dead on this machine for some reason.  The BIOS
allocates irq 4 to the second of the 8139 cards and neither
serial port is recognised so I'm not sure how to get any
major chunk of the Panic info off teh 14" screen.  Note 
that this machine runs 2.2.18 fine albiet my OnStream 
drive doesn't function right so maybe the old Becker driver
does solve some of the problems.  Arg!  =)

-mwe


On Fri, Dec 15, 2000 at 07:47:35PM +0100, Ingo Oeser wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 06:52:34PM +0000, Eckhard Jokisch wrote:
> > Is it possible that there is something wrong with the 8139too driver? 
> > ( I also use a card with 8139 chip )
> > Or do you use the "old" rtl8139 ? With that I don't have any problems.
> > I have an extra machine here where I can do all testing - how can I help?
> 
> I have no Realtek-Card and have the same lockup.
> 
> I also got a hard lockup (but with Oops) while calling the
> "vendor CPU init" function during system boot.
> 
> This was on Cyrix III.
> 
> PS: CC'ed hpa, because he is cpu-detection maintainer and davej,
>    because he added Cyrix III support and might know details ;-)
> 
> Regards
> 
> Ingo Oeser

-- 
Mike Elmore
mike@kre8tive.org

"Never confuse activity with accomplishment."
				-unknown

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: test12 lockups -- need feedback

[Ingo Oeser]

On Fri, Dec 15, 2000 at 09:52:22AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > This was on Cyrix III.
> 
> Please include the oops information, as well as the /proc/cpuinfo output.

processor       : 0
vendor_id       : CentaurHauls
cpu family      : 6
model           : 6
model name      : WinChip ??
stepping        : 0
cpu MHz         : 501.000148
cache size      : 128 KB
fdiv_bug        : no
hlt_bug         : no
sep_bug         : no
f00f_bug        : no
coma_bug        : no
fpu             : yes
fpu_exception   : yes
cpuid level     : 1
wp              : yes
flags           : fpu de tsc msr mce cx8 mtrr pge mmx
bogomips        : 999.42
processor       : 0
vendor_id       : CentaurHauls
cpu family      : 6
model           : 6
model name      : WinChip ??
stepping        : 0
cpu MHz         : 501.000148
cache size      : 128 KB
fdiv_bug        : no
hlt_bug         : no
sep_bug         : no
f00f_bug        : no
coma_bug        : no
fpu             : yes
fpu_exception   : yes
cpuid level     : 1
wp              : yes
flags           : fpu de tsc msr mce cx8 mtrr pge mmx
bogomips        : 999.42

Oops not available, because this machine is in a frozen state (in
project management context) running a specially patched test9.

It oopsed after this message:
CPU: Before vendor init, caps: <the actual caps>

The only symbols on stack where "empty_bad_page" and "L6" without
any offset.

I'll get access to a clone of this machine on monday and oops it
again ;-)

But perhaps this is helpful in any matter.

Regards & Thanks

Ingo Oeser
-- 
10.+11.03.2001 - 3. Chemnitzer LinuxTag <http://www.tu-chemnitz.de/linux/tag>
         <<<<<<<<<<<<       come and join the fun       >>>>>>>>>>>>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: test12 lockups -- need feedback

[Ingo Oeser]

On Fri, Dec 15, 2000 at 06:06:58PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > This was on Cyrix III.
> > Please include the oops information, as well as the /proc/cpuinfo output.
> Also be sure you built Pentium/TSC kernels as Cyrix III is a 686 core without
> the cmov instruction it seems

I did. And built with gcc 2.95.2 (debian potato) if that matters.

Regards

Ingo Oeser
-- 
10.+11.03.2001 - 3. Chemnitzer LinuxTag <http://www.tu-chemnitz.de/linux/tag>
         <<<<<<<<<<<<       come and join the fun       >>>>>>>>>>>>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/