From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Subject: Re: Re: Freeze with 2.6.32-5 and xen-4.0.2-rc1-pre Lockup Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 11:55:19 -0500 Message-ID: <20101213165519.GA2108@dumpdata.com> References: <4C73879E.5020306@goop.org> <4C745433.5060303@rocnet.de> <4C74CE33.4010908@rocnet.de> <20100825085302.GN2804@reaktio.net> <4C776349.6090300@rocnet.de> <1291529597950-3292728.post@n5.nabble.com> <1291655451433-3294338.post@n5.nabble.com> <1291655994759-3294350.post@n5.nabble.com> <1291947870304-3299745.post@n5.nabble.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1291947870304-3299745.post@n5.nabble.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Mark Brown , Ian.Campbell@citrix.com Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 06:24:30PM -0800, Mark Brown wrote: > > Here some more details on the lockup: > > HW: Intel DQ45CB with E7100 CPU, 4GB RAM. > > (XEN) Command line: console=com1 com1=115200,8n1 acpi=strict apic=debug > [ 0.000000] Command line: root=/dev/mapper/750GB-XEN ro console=hvc0 > xen-pciback.hide=(01:00.0)(01:01.0) acpi=strict > > Crash looks like this: > [ 9896.769906] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#0 stuck for 72s! [qemu-dm:17447] .. snip .. > [ 9896.769906] Pid: 17447, comm: qemu-dm Not tainted 2.6.32-5-xen-amd64 #1 > [ 9896.769906] RIP: 0033:[<00007f708082b968>] [<00007f708082b968>] > 0x7f708082b968 > [ 9896.769906] RSP: 002b:00007fff23d56f08 EFLAGS: 00000202 > [ 9896.769906] RAX: 0000000000000001 RBX: 0000000000c65a00 RCX: > ffffffff810092eb > [ 9896.769906] RDX: 0000000000000001 RSI: 0000000000000085 RDI: > 0000000000ac43a4 > [ 9896.769906] RBP: 0000000000ca7200 R08: 0000000000ac43a0 R09: > 0000000004000001 .. snip .. > type=IO-APIC-level status=00000010 in-flight=1 domain-list=0: 21(P-MM), > (XEN) IRQ: 22 affinity:00000000,00000000,00000000,00000001 vec:91 That looks quite suspect. Ian, this kernel - it wouldn't have your fix for the memset?