Hi Adrian
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
Kernel regressions should be reported to the sparclinux kernel mailing list [1].
Also, a bisect would be helpful to determine which commit broke the kernel.
after several reboots, I could not reproduce "that" looping crash
anymore, but I always got into maintenance mode.
Is that a kernel issue too? I don't know..- I'd like to understand what
the issue is. I don't even know if it is a kernel issue, but I suppose so.
It happened once also when booting a known good 6.1 kernel... during
these tests. The sytem has been stable for long.
I tried fetching from snapshots
Linux narya 6.3.0-2-sparc64-smp #1 SMP Debian 6.3.11-1 (2023-07-01)
sparc64 GNU/Linux
And it too fails:
/dev/sda2: clean, 432715/4276224 files, 8940034/17089844 blocks
[ 41.713577] /dev/sda: Can't open blockdev
[FAILED] Failed to mount boot.mount - /boot.
[DEPEND] Dependency failed for local-fs.target - Local File Systems.
You are in emergency mode. After logging in, type "journalctl -xb" to view
system logs, "systemctl reboot" to reboot, or "exit"
to continue bootup.
Give root password for maintenance
this looks like failing to mount root, which is internal SCSI.
The exception I see in dmesg is:
[ 43.220522] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[ 43.220545] WARNING: CPU: 25 PID: 666 at kernel/irq/msi.c:196
msi_domain_free_descs+0xf4/0x120
[ 43.220600] Modules linked in: sunrpc binfmt_misc libdes sg flash
loop drm drm_panel_orientation_quirks i2c_core fuse dm_mod configfs
ip_tables x_tables autofs4 ext4 crc1n
[ 43.221112] CPU: 25 PID: 666 Comm: ip Not tainted 6.3.0-2-sparc64-smp
#1 Debian 6.3.11-1
[ 43.221140] Call Trace:
[ 43.221153] [<0000000000dda8cc>] dump_stack+0x8/0x18
[ 43.221194] [<000000000046e228>] __warn+0xc8/0x120
[ 43.221223] [<000000000046e2e0>] warn_slowpath_fmt+0x60/0x100
[ 43.221251] [<00000000004f8194>] msi_domain_free_descs+0xf4/0x120
[ 43.221287] [<00000000004f8640>]
msi_domain_free_msi_descs_range+0x20/0x40
[ 43.221323] [<0000000000a13d20>] pci_msi_teardown_msi_irqs+0x40/0x60
[ 43.221357] [<0000000000a1372c>] pci_free_msi_irqs+0xc/0x40
[ 43.221385] [<0000000000a11950>] pci_disable_msi+0x50/0x80
[ 43.221413] [<000000001012fa00>] e1000e_open+0x420/0x600 [e1000e]
[ 43.221572] [<0000000000b871ec>] __dev_open+0xec/0x1c0
[ 43.221601] [<0000000000b87718>] __dev_change_flags+0x1b8/0x260
[ 43.221628] [<0000000000b877dc>] dev_change_flags+0x1c/0x80
[ 43.221654] [<0000000000b98d84>] do_setlink+0x304/0x1220
[ 43.221680] [<0000000000b9f4a8>] __rtnl_newlink+0x548/0x880
[ 43.221707] [<0000000000b9f814>] rtnl_newlink+0x34/0x60
[ 43.221732] [<0000000000b97884>] rtnetlink_rcv_msg+0x244/0x340
[ 43.221758] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---
[ 45.317910] e1000e 0000:04:00.0 enp4s0f0: NIC Link is Up 1000 Mbps
Full Duplex, Flow Control: Rx/Tx
which looks more related to ethernet, or do I misread it?
Riccardo
