From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754021AbaHUJjc (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Aug 2014 05:39:32 -0400 Received: from mail-wg0-f43.google.com ([74.125.82.43]:54477 "EHLO mail-wg0-f43.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753468AbaHUJjb (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Aug 2014 05:39:31 -0400 Message-ID: <53F5BE3D.5070209@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 10:39:09 +0100 From: Iain Paton User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Fabio Estevam CC: Mattis Lorentzon , Fredrik Noring , Russell King - ARM Linux , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Subject: Re: Oops: 17 SMP ARM (v3.16-rc2) References: <20140626151424.GT32514@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20140627163108.GP32514@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20140806095012.GN30282@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20140806125550.GO30282@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20140807121248.GY30282@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20140808180900.GG30282@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <53F11FF6.8030303@gmail.com> <53F2E89B.80009@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <53F2E89B.80009@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 19/08/14 07:03, Iain Paton wrote: > On 17/08/14 22:46, Fabio Estevam wrote: >> Iain, >> >> On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 6:34 PM, Iain Paton wrote: >>> On 15/08/14 06:42, Mattis Lorentzon wrote: >>> >>>> We mostly run SSH with benchmarks using NFS, it can probably be >>>> triggered by using only SSH with the following loop: >>>> >>>> # while : ; do ssh arm-card date; done >>> >>> Mattis, >>> >>> What sort of time does it take for you to see a problem? >>> >>> I've been running the above for nearly two days on 3.16.0 on a board >>> with fec interrupts routed through gpio_6 and haven't seen a hint of >>> a problem. >> >> Thanks for testing. >> >> Which mx6 board have you used on this test? > > It's currently pointed at a RIoTboard (atheros phy) but I'm happy to > try it against both a Sabre-Lite and a Wandboard B1, all running the > same kernel binary, as well. > > I'm interested enough in why different people get different results > with this that I'll put some time towards testing to try to help > narrow down the cause. > two and a half days of running this against both a sabre-lite and a wandboard quad B1 and I still have no reason to think there's any sort of a problem. Up to now, my testing has been done with my own config, I'll now repeat the whole thing using the config Mattis posted to see if I can reproduce it that way. Suggestions on a better / easier / quicker way to reproduce it are welcome.