Am Donnerstag, den 09.09.2010, 04:23 +0100 schrieb Ben Hutchings:
> On Tue, 2010-09-07 at 13:25 +0200, Lukas Kolbe wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 05:26 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 17:34 +0200, Lukas Kolbe wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2010-08-31
On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 05:26 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 17:34 +0200, Lukas Kolbe wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 06:35 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> [...]
> > > Then how about convincing the Debian kernel developers to accept these
> > > patches, an
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 06:35 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 10:16:56AM +0200, Lukas Kolbe wrote:
> > Am Montag, den 30.08.2010, 10:21 -0700 schrieb Greg KH:
> > > On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 09:46:36AM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> > > > From: Greg KH
>
> > Who's done the checks to find out any problems with these patches?
>
> I'll skim the changelogs in 2.6.3[345].x to see if there are any related
> patches.
This is all I could find in current 2.6.36-rc2 (via git log | grep,
minus rps/rfs patches). I don't know anything about these, but they
s
Am Montag, den 30.08.2010, 10:21 -0700 schrieb Greg KH:
> On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 09:46:36AM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> > From: Greg KH
> > Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 07:50:17 -0700
> >
> > > As I stated above, I need the ACK from David to be able to add these
> > > patches.
> > >
> > > David?
> >
On Thu, 2010-08-26 at 09:32 +0200, Lukas Kolbe wrote:
Hi,
> > > I was finally able to identify the patch series that introduced the fix
> > > (they were introduced to -stable in 2.6.33.2):
> > >
> > > cb63112 net: add __must_check to sk_add_backlog
> &g
f this? In the
meantime, we triggered this bug also on barebone hardware using nfs over
tcp with default [rw]sizes of about 1MiB. On the real hardware, the
kernel oopsed, not only the network stack ...
With these patches applied, everything works smoothly. I'd really love
to see a stable 2.6.3
Hi all,
> > I was finally able to identify the patch series that introduced the fix
> > (they were introduced to -stable in 2.6.33.2):
> >
> > cb63112 net: add __must_check to sk_add_backlog
> > a12a9a2 net: backlog functions rename
> > 51c5db4 x25: use limited socket backlog
> > c531ab2 tipc: u
Hi Ben, Greg,
I was finally able to identify the patch series that introduced the fix
(they were introduced to -stable in 2.6.33.2):
cb63112 net: add __must_check to sk_add_backlog
a12a9a2 net: backlog functions rename
51c5db4 x25: use limited socket backlog
c531ab2 tipc: use limited socket backl
Am Mittwoch, den 11.08.2010, 04:28 +0100 schrieb Ben Hutchings:
> I intend to upload linux-2.6 to unstable on Wednesday evening or
> Thursday morning (GMT+1). This should fix the FTBFS, and contains many
> other bug fixes besides. Let me know if there's anything I should wait
> for.
If it is not
Am Mittwoch, den 11.08.2010, 04:13 +0100 schrieb Ben Hutchings:
> On Mon, 2010-08-09 at 11:24 +0200, Lukas Kolbe wrote:
> > So, testing begins.
> >
> > First conclusion: not all traffic patterns produce the page allocation
> > failure. rdiff-backup only writing t
Okay, next round: This time, 2.6.32-19 and virtio in guest, 2.6.32-18 in
the host and sadly, it's not fixed:
[ 159.772700] rdiff-backup.bi: page allocation failure. order:0, mode:0x20
[ 159.772708] Pid: 2524, comm: rdiff-backup.bi Not tainted 2.6.32-5-amd64 #1
[ 159.772710] Call Trace:
[ 159.7
So, testing begins.
First conclusion: not all traffic patterns produce the page allocation
failure. rdiff-backup only writing to an nfs-share does no harm;
rdiff-backup reading and writing (incremental backup) leads to (nearly
immediate) error.
The nfs-share is always mounted with proto=tcp and n
Hi Ben,
Am Sonntag, den 08.08.2010, 03:36 +0100 schrieb Ben Hutchings:
> This is not the same bug as was originally reported, which is that
> virtio_net failed to retry refilling its RX buffer ring. That is
> definitely fixed. So I'm treating this as a new bug report, #592187.
Okay, thanks.
>
Am Samstag, den 07.08.2010, 12:18 +0100 schrieb Ben Hutchings:
> On Sat, 2010-08-07 at 11:21 +0200, Lukas Kolbe wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I sent this earlier today but the bug was archived so it didn't appear
> > anywhere, hence the resend.
> >
> > I beli
reported to bugzilla.kernel.org as
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15578
thanks,
Lukas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1268992407.2794
Package: linux-2.6
Version: 2.6.33-1
Hi again,
we've just seen a very similar crash on a different host with 2.6.33-1.
After the last trace, the machine crashed. I'll report this to upstream
bugzilla as well and let you know about the bugnumber.
Mar 18 20:11:22 simon kernel: [87960.628069] kswap
Package: linux-2.6
Version: 2.6.32-9
Hi all,
we have numerous fileservers currently running variants of 2.6.30,
2.6.32 and 2.6.33. When we used 2.6.32-9 (with ABI version 3), we got
repeated crashes on one server in kswapd and flush. Three hours after
these traces, the machine crashed hard (no co
Hi Moritz,
> Does this bug still persist with the current Lenny kernel?
Lucky me (sort of) - we stumbled upon this bug again on another server
(8 cores, 8 GB Ram) using 2.6.26-1-amd64_2.6.26-11, and fortune wants it
that it will be under heavy load tomorrow so that we can try the -12
kernel. I'll
Am Sonntag, den 14.12.2008, 23:50 +0100 schrieb Moritz Muehlenhoff:
> On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 03:56:49PM +0200, Lukas Kolbe wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > > >seeing if it is fixed in 2.6.27-rc5 might be more interesting.
> > > >thanks
> > >
> > &
Hi,
> > So far the 2.6.27-rc5 seems to be stable, at least it hasn't crashed on
> > me. What can I do to help to get the needed fix to testing? (I know that
> > this kernel won't make it and that's a good thing, but I don't really
> > know how to identify what's needed to fix this).
>
> Does this
Hi!
> >seeing if it is fixed in 2.6.27-rc5 might be more interesting.
> >thanks
>
> 2.6.27-rc5 has now been running fine in the guest for more than four
> hours (and me restarting jboss every now and then). I'll report back tomorrow
> evening, that would be the timeframe
> the bug should've trig
maximilian attems wrote:
>On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 02:36:00PM +0200, Lukas Kolbe wrote:
>>
>> Sorry, my previous answer didn't make it through my mail setup. I was
>> using 2.6.26-4snapshot.12144 when the crash happened. I'll try it with
>> the current snapsho
Sorry, my previous answer didn't make it through my mail setup. I was
using 2.6.26-4snapshot.12144 when the crash happened. I'll try it with
the current snapshot again, though the changelog doesn't say anything
about actual changes :)
--
Lukas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
w
maximilian attems wrote:
>should be fixed in 2.6.26-4, should be available tomorrow in unstable.
>otherwise find sid snapshots http://wiki.debian.org/DebianKernel
>
Sorry, but it crashed on me again - this time stuck in swapper.
[36037.786125] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for
4097s! [swapper:0
Package: linux-image-2.6.26-1-amd64
Version: 2.6.26-3
Severity: important
Using kvm 72, the guest is started with:
kvm -smp 2 \
-net nic,macaddr=DE:AD:BE:EF:21:71,model=virtio \
-net tap,ifname=tap02,script=/etc/kvm/kvm-ifup \
-net nic,macaddr=DE:AD:BE:EF:21:72,model=virtio \
-net tap,ifname=
I see this bug is now 183 days old, but I fell into the same trap.
Recently, after upgrading to kernel-image-2.6.8-2-sparc64, The keyboard
got a wrong layout - pretty much every key know has another meaning.
Unfortunately, the the old 2.4 kernel is not bootable (silo has
forgotten about it) any mo
27 matches
Mail list logo
