FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > CentOS > CentOS

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 07-26-2008, 08:29 AM
"Ian jonhson"
 
Default BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 61s!

Dear All,

I selected CentOS5 in my works and installed them in two DELL PowerEdge1950.
However, a trouble blocked me during the machines run after two days.
The machines
crashed and the syslog said it got the following messages:

------------------ part dump of /var/log/messages ----------------------

.....
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c045bc58>] ? exit_mmap+0x93/0xc9
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04214c2>] ? mmput+0x25/0x68
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046e9c9>] ? flush_old_exec+0x4f8/0x777
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046dfcf>] ? kernel_read+0x32/0x43
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c0490e60>] ? load_elf_binary+0x359/0x1152
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c045a6ee>] ? get_user_pages+0x2d5/0x35c
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04570d2>] ? page_address+0x78/0x98
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c045735a>] ? kmap_high+0x19/0x16b
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04570d2>] ? page_address+0x78/0x98
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046dced>] ? copy_strings+0x169/0x173
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046ddad>] ?
search_binary_handler+0x8f/0x1af
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046efe7>] ? do_execve+0x133/0x194
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04030d7>] ? sys_execve+0x2a/0x4a
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04047aa>] ? syscall_call+0x7/0xb
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c0610000>] ? early_init_intel+0x0/0x3c
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: =======================
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#7 stuck for
61s! [sshd:24188]
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel:
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: Pid: 24188, comm: sshd Not tainted
(2.6.25.3 #3)
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: EIP: 0060:[<c06154f0>] EFLAGS: 00200293 CPU: 7
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: EIP is at _spin_lock+0xa/0x15
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: EAX: c079349c EBX: f79ec580 ECX:
ffffffff EDX: 00008381
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: ESI: ffffffff EDI: f79ec580 EBP:
f68a6580 ESP: f1824e50
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 00d8 GS: 0000 SS: 0068
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: CR0: 8005003b CR2: b7ebf978 CR3:
32996000 CR4: 000006f0
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: DR0: 00000000 DR1: 00000000 DR2:
00000000 DR3: 00000000
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: DR6: ffff0ff0 DR7: 00000400
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04119c7>] ?
native_flush_tlb_others+0x49/0x9b
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c0411e65>] ? flush_tlb_mm+0x51/0x54
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c045bc58>] ? exit_mmap+0x93/0xc9
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04214c2>] ? mmput+0x25/0x68
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046e9c9>] ? flush_old_exec+0x4f8/0x777
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046dfcf>] ? kernel_read+0x32/0x43
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c0490e60>] ? load_elf_binary+0x359/0x1152
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c045a6ee>] ? get_user_pages+0x2d5/0x35c
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04570d2>] ? page_address+0x78/0x98
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c045735a>] ? kmap_high+0x19/0x16b
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04570d2>] ? page_address+0x78/0x98
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046dced>] ? copy_strings+0x169/0x173
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046ddad>] ?
search_binary_handler+0x8f/0x1af
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046efe7>] ? do_execve+0x133/0x194
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04030d7>] ? sys_execve+0x2a/0x4a
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04047aa>] ? syscall_call+0x7/0xb
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c0610000>] ? early_init_intel+0x0/0x3c
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: =======================
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for
61s! [http_cap:12228]
.............
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I choose CentOS because I believe it is the most stable OS in
commodity machines.
But I don't know how to do when facing the trouble.

The difference lies in that I patched a PF_RING patch in original
kernel and recompiled
the kernel to run my machines. I wonder whether the patched kernel
crashes the CentOS
because PF_RING automatically downloads the kernel codes from
www.kernel.org, but not
the one from www.centos.org? Or, the centOS holds the bugs in its distribution?

Hope somebody can given me some advices.
Thanks in advance.


Best Regards,

Ian
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 07-26-2008, 04:45 PM
Johnny Hughes
 
Default BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 61s!

Ian jonhson wrote:

Dear All,

I selected CentOS5 in my works and installed them in two DELL PowerEdge1950.
However, a trouble blocked me during the machines run after two days.
The machines
crashed and the syslog said it got the following messages:

------------------ part dump of /var/log/messages ----------------------

.....
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c045bc58>] ? exit_mmap+0x93/0xc9
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04214c2>] ? mmput+0x25/0x68
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046e9c9>] ? flush_old_exec+0x4f8/0x777
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046dfcf>] ? kernel_read+0x32/0x43
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c0490e60>] ? load_elf_binary+0x359/0x1152
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c045a6ee>] ? get_user_pages+0x2d5/0x35c
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04570d2>] ? page_address+0x78/0x98
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c045735a>] ? kmap_high+0x19/0x16b
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04570d2>] ? page_address+0x78/0x98
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046dced>] ? copy_strings+0x169/0x173
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046ddad>] ?
search_binary_handler+0x8f/0x1af
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046efe7>] ? do_execve+0x133/0x194
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04030d7>] ? sys_execve+0x2a/0x4a
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04047aa>] ? syscall_call+0x7/0xb
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c0610000>] ? early_init_intel+0x0/0x3c
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: =======================
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#7 stuck for
61s! [sshd:24188]
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel:
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: Pid: 24188, comm: sshd Not tainted
(2.6.25.3 #3)
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: EIP: 0060:[<c06154f0>] EFLAGS: 00200293 CPU: 7
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: EIP is at _spin_lock+0xa/0x15
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: EAX: c079349c EBX: f79ec580 ECX:
ffffffff EDX: 00008381
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: ESI: ffffffff EDI: f79ec580 EBP:
f68a6580 ESP: f1824e50
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 00d8 GS: 0000 SS: 0068
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: CR0: 8005003b CR2: b7ebf978 CR3:
32996000 CR4: 000006f0
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: DR0: 00000000 DR1: 00000000 DR2:
00000000 DR3: 00000000
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: DR6: ffff0ff0 DR7: 00000400
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04119c7>] ?
native_flush_tlb_others+0x49/0x9b
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c0411e65>] ? flush_tlb_mm+0x51/0x54
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c045bc58>] ? exit_mmap+0x93/0xc9
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04214c2>] ? mmput+0x25/0x68
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046e9c9>] ? flush_old_exec+0x4f8/0x777
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046dfcf>] ? kernel_read+0x32/0x43
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c0490e60>] ? load_elf_binary+0x359/0x1152
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c045a6ee>] ? get_user_pages+0x2d5/0x35c
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04570d2>] ? page_address+0x78/0x98
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c045735a>] ? kmap_high+0x19/0x16b
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04570d2>] ? page_address+0x78/0x98
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046dced>] ? copy_strings+0x169/0x173
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046ddad>] ?
search_binary_handler+0x8f/0x1af
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046efe7>] ? do_execve+0x133/0x194
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04030d7>] ? sys_execve+0x2a/0x4a
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04047aa>] ? syscall_call+0x7/0xb
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c0610000>] ? early_init_intel+0x0/0x3c
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: =======================
Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for
61s! [http_cap:12228]
.............
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I choose CentOS because I believe it is the most stable OS in
commodity machines.
But I don't know how to do when facing the trouble.

The difference lies in that I patched a PF_RING patch in original
kernel and recompiled
the kernel to run my machines. I wonder whether the patched kernel
crashes the CentOS
because PF_RING automatically downloads the kernel codes from
www.kernel.org, but not
the one from www.centos.org? Or, the centOS holds the bugs in its distribution?



This is very common, a google search for:

'poweredge 1950' 'BUG: soft lockup' 'stuck'

produces almost 2000 results. It seems to be something to do with the
on board network ports.


I do not seen this problem ... has anyone else?

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 07-28-2008, 02:11 AM
"Ian jonhson"
 
Default BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 61s!

google said that is a bug of kernel in network driver.

And, someone seems to present a patch to fix the bug, however
I would like to know whether it can work from others' works becuause
reinstalling a new kernel may let us cost a lot.


On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 12:45 AM, Johnny Hughes <johnny@centos.org> wrote:
> Ian jonhson wrote:
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> I selected CentOS5 in my works and installed them in two DELL
>> PowerEdge1950.
>> However, a trouble blocked me during the machines run after two days.
>> The machines
>> crashed and the syslog said it got the following messages:
>>
>> ------------------ part dump of /var/log/messages ----------------------
>>
>> .....
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c045bc58>] ? exit_mmap+0x93/0xc9
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04214c2>] ? mmput+0x25/0x68
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046e9c9>] ?
>> flush_old_exec+0x4f8/0x777
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046dfcf>] ? kernel_read+0x32/0x43
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c0490e60>] ?
>> load_elf_binary+0x359/0x1152
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c045a6ee>] ?
>> get_user_pages+0x2d5/0x35c
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04570d2>] ? page_address+0x78/0x98
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c045735a>] ? kmap_high+0x19/0x16b
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04570d2>] ? page_address+0x78/0x98
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046dced>] ? copy_strings+0x169/0x173
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046ddad>] ?
>> search_binary_handler+0x8f/0x1af
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046efe7>] ? do_execve+0x133/0x194
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04030d7>] ? sys_execve+0x2a/0x4a
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04047aa>] ? syscall_call+0x7/0xb
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c0610000>] ? early_init_intel+0x0/0x3c
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: =======================
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#7 stuck for
>> 61s! [sshd:24188]
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel:
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: Pid: 24188, comm: sshd Not tainted
>> (2.6.25.3 #3)
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: EIP: 0060:[<c06154f0>] EFLAGS: 00200293
>> CPU: 7
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: EIP is at _spin_lock+0xa/0x15
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: EAX: c079349c EBX: f79ec580 ECX:
>> ffffffff EDX: 00008381
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: ESI: ffffffff EDI: f79ec580 EBP:
>> f68a6580 ESP: f1824e50
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 00d8 GS: 0000 SS:
>> 0068
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: CR0: 8005003b CR2: b7ebf978 CR3:
>> 32996000 CR4: 000006f0
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: DR0: 00000000 DR1: 00000000 DR2:
>> 00000000 DR3: 00000000
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: DR6: ffff0ff0 DR7: 00000400
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04119c7>] ?
>> native_flush_tlb_others+0x49/0x9b
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c0411e65>] ? flush_tlb_mm+0x51/0x54
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c045bc58>] ? exit_mmap+0x93/0xc9
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04214c2>] ? mmput+0x25/0x68
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046e9c9>] ?
>> flush_old_exec+0x4f8/0x777
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046dfcf>] ? kernel_read+0x32/0x43
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c0490e60>] ?
>> load_elf_binary+0x359/0x1152
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c045a6ee>] ?
>> get_user_pages+0x2d5/0x35c
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04570d2>] ? page_address+0x78/0x98
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c045735a>] ? kmap_high+0x19/0x16b
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04570d2>] ? page_address+0x78/0x98
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046dced>] ? copy_strings+0x169/0x173
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046ddad>] ?
>> search_binary_handler+0x8f/0x1af
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046efe7>] ? do_execve+0x133/0x194
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04030d7>] ? sys_execve+0x2a/0x4a
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04047aa>] ? syscall_call+0x7/0xb
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c0610000>] ? early_init_intel+0x0/0x3c
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: =======================
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for
>> 61s! [http_cap:12228]
>> .............
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> I choose CentOS because I believe it is the most stable OS in
>> commodity machines.
>> But I don't know how to do when facing the trouble.
>>
>> The difference lies in that I patched a PF_RING patch in original
>> kernel and recompiled
>> the kernel to run my machines. I wonder whether the patched kernel
>> crashes the CentOS
>> because PF_RING automatically downloads the kernel codes from
>> www.kernel.org, but not
>> the one from www.centos.org? Or, the centOS holds the bugs in its
>> distribution?
>>
>
> This is very common, a google search for:
>
> 'poweredge 1950' 'BUG: soft lockup' 'stuck'
>
> produces almost 2000 results. It seems to be something to do with the on
> board network ports.
>
> I do not seen this problem ... has anyone else?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
>
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 07-28-2008, 04:57 AM
"Ian jonhson"
 
Default BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 61s!

BTW, the patched kernel by PF_RING is version 2.6.25.3.

On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 12:45 AM, Johnny Hughes <johnny@centos.org> wrote:
> Ian jonhson wrote:
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> I selected CentOS5 in my works and installed them in two DELL
>> PowerEdge1950.
>> However, a trouble blocked me during the machines run after two days.
>> The machines
>> crashed and the syslog said it got the following messages:
>>
>> ------------------ part dump of /var/log/messages ----------------------
>>
>> .....
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c045bc58>] ? exit_mmap+0x93/0xc9
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04214c2>] ? mmput+0x25/0x68
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046e9c9>] ?
>> flush_old_exec+0x4f8/0x777
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046dfcf>] ? kernel_read+0x32/0x43
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c0490e60>] ?
>> load_elf_binary+0x359/0x1152
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c045a6ee>] ?
>> get_user_pages+0x2d5/0x35c
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04570d2>] ? page_address+0x78/0x98
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c045735a>] ? kmap_high+0x19/0x16b
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04570d2>] ? page_address+0x78/0x98
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046dced>] ? copy_strings+0x169/0x173
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046ddad>] ?
>> search_binary_handler+0x8f/0x1af
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046efe7>] ? do_execve+0x133/0x194
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04030d7>] ? sys_execve+0x2a/0x4a
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04047aa>] ? syscall_call+0x7/0xb
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c0610000>] ? early_init_intel+0x0/0x3c
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: =======================
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#7 stuck for
>> 61s! [sshd:24188]
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel:
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: Pid: 24188, comm: sshd Not tainted
>> (2.6.25.3 #3)
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: EIP: 0060:[<c06154f0>] EFLAGS: 00200293
>> CPU: 7
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: EIP is at _spin_lock+0xa/0x15
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: EAX: c079349c EBX: f79ec580 ECX:
>> ffffffff EDX: 00008381
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: ESI: ffffffff EDI: f79ec580 EBP:
>> f68a6580 ESP: f1824e50
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 00d8 GS: 0000 SS:
>> 0068
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: CR0: 8005003b CR2: b7ebf978 CR3:
>> 32996000 CR4: 000006f0
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: DR0: 00000000 DR1: 00000000 DR2:
>> 00000000 DR3: 00000000
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: DR6: ffff0ff0 DR7: 00000400
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04119c7>] ?
>> native_flush_tlb_others+0x49/0x9b
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c0411e65>] ? flush_tlb_mm+0x51/0x54
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c045bc58>] ? exit_mmap+0x93/0xc9
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04214c2>] ? mmput+0x25/0x68
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046e9c9>] ?
>> flush_old_exec+0x4f8/0x777
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046dfcf>] ? kernel_read+0x32/0x43
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c0490e60>] ?
>> load_elf_binary+0x359/0x1152
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c045a6ee>] ?
>> get_user_pages+0x2d5/0x35c
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04570d2>] ? page_address+0x78/0x98
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c045735a>] ? kmap_high+0x19/0x16b
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04570d2>] ? page_address+0x78/0x98
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046dced>] ? copy_strings+0x169/0x173
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046ddad>] ?
>> search_binary_handler+0x8f/0x1af
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c046efe7>] ? do_execve+0x133/0x194
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04030d7>] ? sys_execve+0x2a/0x4a
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c04047aa>] ? syscall_call+0x7/0xb
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: [<c0610000>] ? early_init_intel+0x0/0x3c
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: =======================
>> Jul 25 02:15:02 vega2008 kernel: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for
>> 61s! [http_cap:12228]
>> .............
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> I choose CentOS because I believe it is the most stable OS in
>> commodity machines.
>> But I don't know how to do when facing the trouble.
>>
>> The difference lies in that I patched a PF_RING patch in original
>> kernel and recompiled
>> the kernel to run my machines. I wonder whether the patched kernel
>> crashes the CentOS
>> because PF_RING automatically downloads the kernel codes from
>> www.kernel.org, but not
>> the one from www.centos.org? Or, the centOS holds the bugs in its
>> distribution?
>>
>
> This is very common, a google search for:
>
> 'poweredge 1950' 'BUG: soft lockup' 'stuck'
>
> produces almost 2000 results. It seems to be something to do with the on
> board network ports.
>
> I do not seen this problem ... has anyone else?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
>
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 07-28-2008, 09:11 AM
Johnny Hughes
 
Default BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 61s!

Ian jonhson wrote:

BTW, the patched kernel by PF_RING is version 2.6.25.3.



I do not have anything that new in testing .. however we do have this,
which you might try to see if it still happens:


http://people.centos.org/hughesjr/kernel-rt/

Dell might also have modules posted for this machine.

These say EL5 should work:

https://hardware.redhat.com/show.cgi?id=227919

https://hardware.redhat.com/show.cgi?id=375801

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 07-28-2008, 05:19 PM
Scott Silva
 
Default BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 61s!

I choose CentOS because I believe it is the most stable OS in
commodity machines.
But I don't know how to do when facing the trouble.

The difference lies in that I patched a PF_RING patch in original
kernel and recompiled
the kernel to run my machines. I wonder whether the patched kernel
crashes the CentOS
because PF_RING automatically downloads the kernel codes from
www.kernel.org, but not
the one from www.centos.org? Or, the centOS holds the bugs in its distribution?


When you use a custom kernel, you usually get to keep the pieces.

Go buy a new car and change the engine and then see if they honor the warranty.

We stopped using Dell machines some time ago. For some reason there
reliability has been steadily falling. I don't know if they are doing
non-standard stuff in their bios's or just using less than optimal hardware to
cut costs, but I probably won't go back.




--
MailScanner is like deodorant...
You hope everybody uses it, and
you notice quickly if they don't!!!!

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 07-29-2008, 04:27 AM
"Ian jonhson"
 
Default BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 61s!

> When you use a custom kernel, you usually get to keep the pieces.
>
> Go buy a new car and change the engine and then see if they honor the
> warranty.
>
> We stopped using Dell machines some time ago. For some reason there
> reliability has been steadily falling. I don't know if they are doing
> non-standard stuff in their bios's or just using less than optimal hardware
> to cut costs, but I probably won't go back.
>

agree. I have turn back to original CentOS kernel, and then restart my
program. In other words, my program run without PF_RING. By now,
nothing happens. Therefore, it seems the bug results from PF_RING
patch.

Thanks for your help.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 07-29-2008, 11:44 AM
Johnny Hughes
 
Default BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 61s!

Scott Silva wrote:




I choose CentOS because I believe it is the most stable OS in
commodity machines.
But I don't know how to do when facing the trouble.

The difference lies in that I patched a PF_RING patch in original
kernel and recompiled
the kernel to run my machines. I wonder whether the patched kernel
crashes the CentOS
because PF_RING automatically downloads the kernel codes from
www.kernel.org, but not
the one from www.centos.org? Or, the centOS holds the bugs in its
distribution?



When you use a custom kernel, you usually get to keep the pieces.

Go buy a new car and change the engine and then see if they honor the
warranty.


We stopped using Dell machines some time ago. For some reason there
reliability has been steadily falling. I don't know if they are doing
non-standard stuff in their bios's or just using less than optimal
hardware to cut costs, but I probably won't go back.


well ... my $work has been using dell exclusively for servers and
workstations for 5 years.


I have had no real issues with either the poweredge servers or the
desktops and Dell has always sent parts in a timely manner to replace
any broken system under warranty.


We don't have too many servers (about 20 in 5 locations) or workstations
(about 150 in 5 locations) but I have had no problem with Dell machines
or their service ... maybe I am just lucky.


Thanks,
Johnny Hughes

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 07-29-2008, 03:15 PM
"nate"
 
Default BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 61s!

Johnny Hughes wrote:

> We don't have too many servers (about 20 in 5 locations) or workstations
> (about 150 in 5 locations) but I have had no problem with Dell machines
> or their service ... maybe I am just lucky.

The company I'm at has about 380 dell servers and probably 100 desktops.
For the most part they work fine.

We did have a problem with firmware on Seagate drives that came in
the servers though. The company spent months trying to track down
the source of the problem before I was hired. It didn't take me too
long to narrow it down. The issue was multithreaded reads/writes
to the disk under their application was 10x slower on some systems
than others. Normal disk benchmark tools didn't pick up anything
unusual. And my co-workers said Dell support was worthless for
anything other than flat out RMA (I've never dealt with them so
can't say from personal experience). My experience with HP support
has been similar though, so I don't doubt it.

But I noticed pretty quick after I was hired that the systems that
had problems had Seagate drives, and the ones that did not had Maxtor,
or Fujitsu drives. Unfortunately upgrading the drive firmware was a
painful procedure involving booting to DOS. After updating the
problem was gone, of course.

Why some drives shipped with Maxtor, some with Fujitsu, and some with
Seagate drives I don't know(all the same model#). I've been told
that Dell has a history of swapping out components to whichever is
the cheapest that week, it seems that's the case at least with HDDs.

Never personally had a problem with firmware on a disk in my experience
with thousands of drives over the past 15 years or so. Not sure how
that got past Dell's "QA". Maybe it was a compatibility issue with
their RAID controller and that firmware rev on the disk.

I suppose the main thing I don't like about Dell that I did like
about the HP systems was being able to monitor the RAID array was
pretty simple with HP, we installed a tool called 'hpacucli', no
extra drivers needed, and it worked fine. With Dell the only tool
I've found is 'raidcfg', and that seems to require a bunch of extra
packages and drivers to be installed. And on at least a couple different
types of Dell systems it causes them to hang when I run it. I really
don't like installing "extra" drivers for management stuff. I never
installed the HP management packs, and don't plan to touch the Dell
stuff either(short of raidcfg and it's dependencies).

Dell doesn't seem to be too bad though, I honestly expected more
problems given the pricing of the systems. Some of the pricing
is even cheaper than a local Supermicro reseller, and I'm talking
low quantities even. One of my former employers switched to Dell
after they were bought out by a bigger company(bigger company's
policy) and they pay at least 50% less than we do.

I've only been working with them for a few months now.

nate

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 
Old 07-29-2008, 03:47 PM
Scott Silva
 
Default BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 61s!

on 7-29-2008 4:44 AM Johnny Hughes spake the following:

Scott Silva wrote:




I choose CentOS because I believe it is the most stable OS in
commodity machines.
But I don't know how to do when facing the trouble.

The difference lies in that I patched a PF_RING patch in original
kernel and recompiled
the kernel to run my machines. I wonder whether the patched kernel
crashes the CentOS
because PF_RING automatically downloads the kernel codes from
www.kernel.org, but not
the one from www.centos.org? Or, the centOS holds the bugs in its
distribution?



When you use a custom kernel, you usually get to keep the pieces.

Go buy a new car and change the engine and then see if they honor the
warranty.


We stopped using Dell machines some time ago. For some reason there
reliability has been steadily falling. I don't know if they are doing
non-standard stuff in their bios's or just using less than optimal
hardware to cut costs, but I probably won't go back.


well ... my $work has been using dell exclusively for servers and
workstations for 5 years.


I have had no real issues with either the poweredge servers or the
desktops and Dell has always sent parts in a timely manner to replace
any broken system under warranty.


We don't have too many servers (about 20 in 5 locations) or workstations
(about 150 in 5 locations) but I have had no problem with Dell machines
or their service ... maybe I am just lucky.


Thanks,
Johnny Hughes

I'm glad you are happy. We have had problems from techs wanting credit cards
to secure parts delivery, to billing and account problems. Also shipping of
completely different systems then what was ordered. Our purchasing department
will not even deal with Dell anymore. They even sent a disputed bill to a
collection agency


--
MailScanner is like deodorant...
You hope everybody uses it, and
you notice quickly if they don't!!!!

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 06:22 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org