This is a slightly edited repost of a note sent on Friday September 28,
as we haven't heard back from anyone yet. (I know it was the weekend!)
Sorry to post again but this issue caused great problems for us and I
want to be sure we're choosing a decent solution.
Perhaps one of the people who
This is a slightly edited repost of a note sent on Friday September 28,
as we haven't heard back from anyone yet. (I know it was the weekend!)
Sorry to post again but this issue caused great problems for us and I
want to be sure we're choosing a decent solution.
Perhaps one of the people who
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:48:14 -0400 Jim Paris wrote:
Hello,
We have about 100 servers based on Intel S5000PSL-SATA motherboards.
They have been running for anywhere between 1 and 10 months. For the
past few months, after updating them all to the 2.6.20.15
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:48:14 -0400 Jim Paris wrote:
Hello,
We have about 100 servers based on Intel S5000PSL-SATA motherboards.
They have been running for anywhere between 1 and 10 months. For the
past few months, after updating them all to the 2.6.20.15
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:48:14 -0400 Jim Paris wrote:
Hello,
We have about 100 servers based on Intel S5000PSL-SATA motherboards.
They have been running for anywhere between 1 and 10 months. For the
past few months, after updating them all to the 2.6.20.15
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:48:14 -0400 Jim Paris wrote:
Hello,
We have about 100 servers based on Intel S5000PSL-SATA motherboards.
They have been running for anywhere between 1 and 10 months. For the
past few months, after updating them all to the 2.6.20.15
Hello,
> We have about 100 servers based on Intel S5000PSL-SATA motherboards.
> They have been running for anywhere between 1 and 10 months. For the
> past few months, after updating them all to the 2.6.20.15 kernel
> (because of a bug in the 2.6.18 kernel), we are seeing some strange NMI
>
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:48:14 -0400 Jim Paris wrote:
> Hello,
>
> > We have about 100 servers based on Intel S5000PSL-SATA motherboards.
> > They have been running for anywhere between 1 and 10 months. For the
> > past few months, after updating them all to the 2.6.20.15 kernel
> > (because of
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:07:14 -0400 samson yeung wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm working with AndrewL733 on this issue. I'm doing the git bisect right now.
>
> scanpci -f -1 causes the problem, scanpci -f -2 and scanpci -O do not.
Does the problem always happen when scanpci is making an ioperm
syscall
Hello,
I'm working with AndrewL733 on this issue. I'm doing the git bisect right now.
scanpci -f -1 causes the problem, scanpci -f -2 and scanpci -O do not.
The systems have two 1-Gig sticks in the D1 and C1 slots of the
motherboard. I ran memtest86 overnight and got no errors. (Samsung 1GB
> Aug 29 09:02:10 master kernel: Uhhuh. NMI received for unknown reason 30.
> Aug 29 09:02:10 master kernel: Do you have a strange power saving mode
> enabled?
What would be useful is to know under what situations that board can
raise NMI 30.
> In other words, Intel seems to be blaming the
Aug 29 09:02:10 master kernel: Uhhuh. NMI received for unknown reason 30.
Aug 29 09:02:10 master kernel: Do you have a strange power saving mode
enabled?
What would be useful is to know under what situations that board can
raise NMI 30.
In other words, Intel seems to be blaming the problem
Hello,
I'm working with AndrewL733 on this issue. I'm doing the git bisect right now.
scanpci -f -1 causes the problem, scanpci -f -2 and scanpci -O do not.
The systems have two 1-Gig sticks in the D1 and C1 slots of the
motherboard. I ran memtest86 overnight and got no errors. (Samsung 1GB
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:07:14 -0400 samson yeung wrote:
Hello,
I'm working with AndrewL733 on this issue. I'm doing the git bisect right now.
scanpci -f -1 causes the problem, scanpci -f -2 and scanpci -O do not.
Does the problem always happen when scanpci is making an ioperm
syscall (as
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 19:48:14 -0400 Jim Paris wrote:
Hello,
We have about 100 servers based on Intel S5000PSL-SATA motherboards.
They have been running for anywhere between 1 and 10 months. For the
past few months, after updating them all to the 2.6.20.15 kernel
(because of a bug in
Hello,
We have about 100 servers based on Intel S5000PSL-SATA motherboards.
They have been running for anywhere between 1 and 10 months. For the
past few months, after updating them all to the 2.6.20.15 kernel
(because of a bug in the 2.6.18 kernel), we are seeing some strange NMI
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 02:12:34 -0800 AndrewL733 wrote:
> We have about 100 servers based on Intel S5000PSL-SATA motherboards.
> They have been running for anywhere between 1 and 10 months. For the
> past few months, after updating them all to the 2.6.20.15 kernel
> (because of a bug in the
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 02:12:34 -0800 AndrewL733 wrote:
> We have about 100 servers based on Intel S5000PSL-SATA motherboards.
product info (for others):
http://support.intel.com/support/motherboards/server/s5000psl/index.htm
> They have been running for anywhere between 1 and 10 months. For the
We have about 100 servers based on Intel S5000PSL-SATA motherboards.
They have been running for anywhere between 1 and 10 months. For the
past few months, after updating them all to the 2.6.20.15 kernel
(because of a bug in the 2.6.18 kernel), we are seeing some strange NMI
errors. For
We have about 100 servers based on Intel S5000PSL-SATA motherboards.
They have been running for anywhere between 1 and 10 months. For the
past few months, after updating them all to the 2.6.20.15 kernel
(because of a bug in the 2.6.18 kernel), we are seeing some strange NMI
errors. For
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 02:12:34 -0800 AndrewL733 wrote:
We have about 100 servers based on Intel S5000PSL-SATA motherboards.
product info (for others):
http://support.intel.com/support/motherboards/server/s5000psl/index.htm
They have been running for anywhere between 1 and 10 months. For the
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 02:12:34 -0800 AndrewL733 wrote:
We have about 100 servers based on Intel S5000PSL-SATA motherboards.
They have been running for anywhere between 1 and 10 months. For the
past few months, after updating them all to the 2.6.20.15 kernel
(because of a bug in the 2.6.18
22 matches
Mail list logo
