On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Pete Zaitcev wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Mar 2007 17:18:29 -0500 (EST), Alan Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I've never heard of a process failing to show up in a SysRq-t listing. It
> > suggests something is wrong with the process management in the kernel you
> > were
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Pete Zaitcev wrote:
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007 17:18:29 -0500 (EST), Alan Stern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've never heard of a process failing to show up in a SysRq-t listing. It
suggests something is wrong with the process management in the kernel you
were using. That
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007 17:18:29 -0500 (EST), Alan Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've never heard of a process failing to show up in a SysRq-t listing. It
> suggests something is wrong with the process management in the kernel you
> were using. That leads me to think a non -mm kernel might
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Eric Buddington wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 03:22:05PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Eric Buddington,,, wrote:
> >
> > > > > So SysRq-t doesn't show anything about khubd, and SysRq-p doesn't give
> > > > > me anything at all. What else can I try?
> >
On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 03:22:05PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Eric Buddington,,, wrote:
>
> > > > So SysRq-t doesn't show anything about khubd, and SysRq-p doesn't give
> > > > me anything at all. What else can I try?
>
> How about SysRq-r?
SysRq : Keyboard mode set to XLATE
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Eric Buddington,,, wrote:
> > > So SysRq-t doesn't show anything about khubd, and SysRq-p doesn't give
> > > me anything at all. What else can I try?
How about SysRq-r?
> > I'm baffled. khubd should have shown up as the process with ID 163. Is
> > that process listed
On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 11:03:21AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Mar 2007, Eric Buddington wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 01:34:41PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > The stack trace didn't include the khubd process at all. Probably that
> > > means it had already died.
> >
> > No,
On Tue, 6 Mar 2007, Eric Buddington wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 01:34:41PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > The stack trace didn't include the khubd process at all. Probably that
> > means it had already died.
>
> No, it's still there. I ran 'echo t >/proc/sysrq-trigger' again, and
> khubd
On Tue, 6 Mar 2007, Eric Buddington wrote:
On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 01:34:41PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
The stack trace didn't include the khubd process at all. Probably that
means it had already died.
No, it's still there. I ran 'echo t /proc/sysrq-trigger' again, and
khubd did not
On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 11:03:21AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
On Tue, 6 Mar 2007, Eric Buddington wrote:
On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 01:34:41PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
The stack trace didn't include the khubd process at all. Probably that
means it had already died.
No, it's still
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Eric Buddington,,, wrote:
So SysRq-t doesn't show anything about khubd, and SysRq-p doesn't give
me anything at all. What else can I try?
How about SysRq-r?
I'm baffled. khubd should have shown up as the process with ID 163. Is
that process listed under a
On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 03:22:05PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Eric Buddington,,, wrote:
So SysRq-t doesn't show anything about khubd, and SysRq-p doesn't give
me anything at all. What else can I try?
How about SysRq-r?
SysRq : Keyboard mode set to XLATE
These
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Eric Buddington wrote:
On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 03:22:05PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Eric Buddington,,, wrote:
So SysRq-t doesn't show anything about khubd, and SysRq-p doesn't give
me anything at all. What else can I try?
How about
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007 17:18:29 -0500 (EST), Alan Stern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've never heard of a process failing to show up in a SysRq-t listing. It
suggests something is wrong with the process management in the kernel you
were using. That leads me to think a non -mm kernel might give
On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 01:34:41PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> The stack trace didn't include the khubd process at all. Probably that
> means it had already died.
No, it's still there. I ran 'echo t >/proc/sysrq-trigger' again, and
khubd did not show up in dmesg:
-bash-2.05b# echo t
On Tue, 6 Mar 2007, Eric Buddington wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 10:36:20AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Tue, 6 Mar 2007, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> >
> > > > Am Dienstag, 6. M??rz 2007 05:13 schrieb Eric Buddington:
> > > > reiser4[khubd(163)]: commit_current_atom
> > > >
On Tue, 6 Mar 2007, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > Am Dienstag, 6. März 2007 05:13 schrieb Eric Buddington:
> > reiser4[khubd(163)]: commit_current_atom
> > (fs/reiser4/txnmgr.c:1049)[nikita-3176]:
> > WARNING: Flushing like mad: 16384
> > reiser4[khubd(163)]: commit_current_atom
> >
On Tue, 6 Mar 2007, Oliver Neukum wrote:
Am Dienstag, 6. März 2007 05:13 schrieb Eric Buddington:
reiser4[khubd(163)]: commit_current_atom
(fs/reiser4/txnmgr.c:1049)[nikita-3176]:
WARNING: Flushing like mad: 16384
reiser4[khubd(163)]: commit_current_atom
On Tue, 6 Mar 2007, Eric Buddington wrote:
On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 10:36:20AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
On Tue, 6 Mar 2007, Oliver Neukum wrote:
Am Dienstag, 6. M??rz 2007 05:13 schrieb Eric Buddington:
reiser4[khubd(163)]: commit_current_atom
On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 01:34:41PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
The stack trace didn't include the khubd process at all. Probably that
means it had already died.
No, it's still there. I ran 'echo t /proc/sysrq-trigger' again, and
khubd did not show up in dmesg:
-bash-2.05b# echo t
20 matches
Mail list logo
