From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756311Ab1EaOYR (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 May 2011 10:24:17 -0400 Received: from vt.electrainfo.com ([207.136.236.70]:60534 "EHLO black.electrainfo.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754782Ab1EaOYQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 May 2011 10:24:16 -0400 Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 10:24:15 -0400 From: Whit Blauvelt To: Mike Galbraith Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: recursive fault in 2.6.35.5 Message-ID: <20110531142415.GA17781@black.transpect.com> References: <20110529162738.GA7832@black.transpect.com> <1306723709.4895.4.camel@marge.simson.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1306723709.4895.4.camel@marge.simson.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 04:48:29AM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > No, you've been bitten by an annoyingly elusive load balancing bug. Thanks Mike. Can that bug be avoided by leaving out some kernel option? The system that happened on had it's identical twin fail the day before. For both, it was a time of relatively more load (although not excessive). On the twin we didn't look at the console before rebooting though. On the other hand, we'd run for months with no problem up until this. Regards, Whit