https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
Sean Bruno changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |Overcome By Events
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #28 from Ed Maste ---
The cluster ThunderX systems are now retired; there is a 2S ThunderX at Sentex
that is working acceptably well (being used by mhorne@ and the Moritz
developers doing lldb work). Is this issue now OBE?
--
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #27 from Glen Barber ---
The build is still broken with r358081 and r357800 cherry-picked...
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #26 from Glen Barber ---
It looks like r358081 is needed, too.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org mailing list
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #25 from Glen Barber ---
The build is broken on that revision... :(
/usr/src/sys/dev/smc/if_smc.c:398:2: error: implicit declaration of function
'NET_TASK_INIT' is invalid in C99 [-Werror,-Wimplicit-funct
ion-declaration]
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #24 from Mark Johnston ---
(In reply to Glen Barber from comment #23)
Can you try cherry-picking r357772 as well? I believe that commit fixes the
regression.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #23 from Glen Barber ---
Unfortunately, the machine insta-panics with r357460.
panic: Assertion in_epoch(net_epoch_preempt) failed at
/usr/src/sys/net/netisr.c:1091
cpuid = 0
Would it be worthwhile to upgrade to a more recent
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
Mark Linimon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #213916|diff|cpu_errata.c.diff
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #22 from Mark Johnston ---
Sean, were you able to test an update to r357460?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
___
freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #21 from Mark Millard ---
(In reply to Mark Johnston from comment #20)
Comment #19 lists: r359745M (unlike comment 17's listing r356207M).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #20 from Mark Johnston ---
(In reply to Sean Bruno from comment #19)
This is on r356207? I guess we can just continue the bisection then. r357460
seems like another good place to test.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #19 from Sean Bruno ---
(In reply to Sean Bruno from comment #18)
Or ... the machine will never panic again and is doing a complete rebuild of
freebsd.org ports/pkgs.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #18 from Sean Bruno ---
Just to make sure that this failure isn't induced by acutally/factually
building pkgs, I built a statically compiled jail to match the kernel to make
sure that I'm not skipping over a failure case.
--
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #17 from Sean Bruno ---
(In reply to Mark Johnston from comment #16)
FreeBSD thunderx1.nyi.freebsd.org 13.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 13.0-CURRENT #3
r356207M: Fri May 1 15:16:03 UTC 2020
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #16 from Mark Johnston ---
(In reply to Sean Bruno from comment #15)
It looks like my guess was wrong. Let's try r356207 next.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #15 from Sean Bruno ---
(In reply to Sean Bruno from comment #14)
No panics overnight, which is a record at this point.
No pkgs built because of a bug in jail that was fixed in -current recently.
:-)
Any revision you'd like
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #14 from Sean Bruno ---
(In reply to Mark Johnston from comment #13)
test in progress.
FreeBSD 13.0-CURRENT #2 r355427M: Thu Apr 30 21:06:45 UTC 2020
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #13 from Mark Johnston ---
(In reply to Sean Bruno from comment #12)
Thanks, that's useful information. Since we are trying to determine if the bug
is in the ASID implementation, let's try updating to r355427 and see if the
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #12 from Sean Bruno ---
(In reply to Sean Bruno from comment #11)
We have built all three jails on the thunderx host and have now proceeded to
the building ports part of portmgr's process.
so, we now know of a "working"
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #11 from Sean Bruno ---
(In reply to Sean Bruno from comment #10)
The machine has survived more than 30 minutes of high load (building world for
multiple jails). I'll let it run for the rest of the day, but I doubt at this
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #10 from Sean Bruno ---
(In reply to Mark Johnston from comment #9)
And needed a -Wno-misleading-indentation to get past a couple other nits. Test
in progress.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #9 from Mark Johnston ---
(In reply to Sean Bruno from comment #8)
Thanks. You might also try cherry-picking r354325.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #8 from Sean Bruno ---
(In reply to Mark Johnston from comment #5)
- Can you run r354285 (r354286 is the commit in question) on one of the systems
and see if the panic is reproducible?
Bah, it doesn't appear that this version
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #7 from Sean Bruno ---
(In reply to Mark Johnston from comment #5)
Definitely hitting that code:
r...@thunderx1.nyi:~ # dmesg|grep installed
installed Cavium erratum 27456 workaround
--
You are receiving this mail because:
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #6 from Sean Bruno ---
Created attachment 213917
--> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=213917=edit
trace from the db> prompt
Here's what I got on the command line. Its not super informative.
--
You are
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #5 from Mark Johnston ---
Created attachment 213916
--> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=213916=edit
print a message when a workaround is applied
(In reply to Sean Bruno from comment #4)
So they were
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #4 from Sean Bruno ---
(In reply to Mark Johnston from comment #3)
We only have 2 thunderx v1 in the freebsd cluster so I'm unable to comment on
thunderx v2 stability. We have experienced this failure on both machines since
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #3 from Mark Johnston ---
(In reply to Sean Bruno from comment #0)
Hmm there is no real information in the ISS, and the FAR doesn't tell us
anything. I guess some general questions would help to start:
- Do you see this only
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
--- Comment #2 from Sean Bruno ---
(In reply to Mark Millard from comment #1)
Specifically, these are Cavium Thunderx servers running this build of -current:
thunderx2.nyi.freebsd.org 13.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 13.0-CURRENT #0 r359745
--
You
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
Mark Millard changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marklmi26-f...@yahoo.com
---
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246004
Bug ID: 246004
Summary: Kernel Panic after moderate amount of activity
Product: Base System
Version: CURRENT
Hardware: arm64
OS: Any
Status: New
31 matches
Mail list logo
