From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964813AbVHIO73 (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Aug 2005 10:59:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964816AbVHIO73 (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Aug 2005 10:59:29 -0400 Received: from viper.oldcity.dca.net ([216.158.38.4]:19363 "HELO viper.oldcity.dca.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S964814AbVHIO72 (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Aug 2005 10:59:28 -0400 Subject: Re: Soft lockup in e100 driver ? From: Lee Revell To: Matti Aarnio Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , Steven Rostedt In-Reply-To: <20050809133647.GK22165@mea-ext.zmailer.org> References: <20050809133647.GK22165@mea-ext.zmailer.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2005 10:58:42 -0400 Message-Id: <1123599524.30101.7.camel@mindpipe> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.3.6.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 16:36 +0300, Matti Aarnio wrote: > Running very recent Fedora Core Development kernel I can following > soft-oops.. ( 2.6.12-1.1455_FC5smp ) > > > e100: eth0: e100_watchdog: link up, 100Mbps, full-duplex > BUG: soft lockup detected on CPU#0! Could this be a false positive? It's suspicious that the soft lockup detector was just merged to mainline then you got this. Lee