On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, Pekka Enberg wrote:
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2008 22:33:33 +0200
From: Pekka Enberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Hugh Dickins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Bug: 2.6.24-smp: Eeek! page_mapcount(page) went negative! (-1)
H
Hi,
On Feb 6, 2008 10:21 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From reboot after last hang on 02/03/08, I found this...
>
> Feb 5 23:26:26 sc-software kernel: [ cut here ]
> Feb 5 23:26:26 sc-software kernel: kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:591!
> Feb 5 23:26:26 sc-software kernel:
On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, Hugh Dickins wrote:
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2008 19:55:36 + (GMT)
From: Hugh Dickins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: John Heil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Bug: 2.6.24-smp: Eeek! page_mapcount(page) went negative! (-1)
On Wed, 6 Feb
On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Before digging into this myself (don't really have enought time),
> I thought I'd submit it here...
Thanks for the report.
> Feb 6 09:09:47 sc-software kernel: Eeek! page_mapcount(page) went negative!
These very often turn out the be due to bad
AIL PROTECTED]
===
Feb 6 09:09:47 sc-software kernel: Eeek! page_mapcount(page) went
negative! (-1)
Feb 6 09:09:47 sc-software kernel: page pfn = 12b1b1
Feb 6 09:09:47 sc-software kernel: page->flags = 80080014
Feb 6 09:09:47 sc-so
Hi,
On Feb 6, 2008 10:21 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From reboot after last hang on 02/03/08, I found this...
Feb 5 23:26:26 sc-software kernel: [ cut here ]
Feb 5 23:26:26 sc-software kernel: kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:591!
Feb 5 23:26:26 sc-software kernel:
On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, Pekka Enberg wrote:
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2008 22:33:33 +0200
From: Pekka Enberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Hugh Dickins [EMAIL PROTECTED], linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Bug: 2.6.24-smp: Eeek! page_mapcount(page) went negative! (-1)
Hi,
On Feb 6
Arnaud Fontaine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> "Dave" == Dave Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Dave> Many of these that I've seen have turned out to be a hardware
> Dave> problem. Try running memtest86+ on that machine for a while.
> Dave> It doesn't catch all problems,
Arnaud Fontaine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dave == Dave Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dave Many of these that I've seen have turned out to be a hardware
Dave problem. Try running memtest86+ on that machine for a while.
Dave It doesn't catch all problems, but it will
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 01:03:02AM +0200, Arnaud Fontaine wrote:
> > "Dave" == Dave Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Dave> Many of these that I've seen have turned out to be a hardware
> Dave> problem. Try running memtest86+ on that machine for a while.
> Dave> It
> "Dave" == Dave Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dave> Many of these that I've seen have turned out to be a hardware
Dave> problem. Try running memtest86+ on that machine for a while.
Dave> It doesn't catch all problems, but it will highlight more
Dave> common memory
On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 07:17:32PM +0200, Arnaud Fontaine wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We have often the following error from the kernel:
>
> sshd[1551] trap invalid opcode rip:2aeacc0677a0 rsp:7fffe0c7e688 error:0
> Eeek! page_mapcount(page) went negative! (-1)
>page p
Hello,
We have often the following error from the kernel:
sshd[1551] trap invalid opcode rip:2aeacc0677a0 rsp:7fffe0c7e688 error:0
Eeek! page_mapcount(page) went negative! (-1)
page pfn = 7f7a8
page->flags = 4001002c
page->count = 1
page->mapping = 8100561705
Hello,
We have often the following error from the kernel:
sshd[1551] trap invalid opcode rip:2aeacc0677a0 rsp:7fffe0c7e688 error:0
Eeek! page_mapcount(page) went negative! (-1)
page pfn = 7f7a8
page-flags = 4001002c
page-count = 1
page-mapping = 810056170550
vma
On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 07:17:32PM +0200, Arnaud Fontaine wrote:
Hello,
We have often the following error from the kernel:
sshd[1551] trap invalid opcode rip:2aeacc0677a0 rsp:7fffe0c7e688 error:0
Eeek! page_mapcount(page) went negative! (-1)
page pfn = 7f7a8
page-flags
Dave == Dave Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dave Many of these that I've seen have turned out to be a hardware
Dave problem. Try running memtest86+ on that machine for a while.
Dave It doesn't catch all problems, but it will highlight more
Dave common memory faults.
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 01:03:02AM +0200, Arnaud Fontaine wrote:
Dave == Dave Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dave Many of these that I've seen have turned out to be a hardware
Dave problem. Try running memtest86+ on that machine for a while.
Dave It doesn't catch all
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 11:41:22AM +0200, Tilman Schmidt wrote:
> On Wed, 2 May 2007 00:43:05 -0700, "Greg KH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > > > And the winner is:
> > > >
> > > > gregkh-driver-driver-core-make-uevent-environment-available-in-uevent-file.patch
> > > >
> > > > Reverting only
Am 02.05.2007 22:07 schrieb Andrew Morton:
>> Started to git-bisect mainline now, but that will take some time.
[...]
> I don't think there's much point in you doing that. We know what the bug is.
Good. Saves me some work. :-)
If you'd like me to test anything, just let me know.
Thanks,
Tilman
On Wed, 02 May 2007 19:36:03 +0200
Tilman Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Am 02.05.2007 09:52 schrieb Greg KH:
> > Tilman, here's a patch, can you try this on top of your tree that dies?
>
> 2.6.21-git3 plus that patch comes up fine.
>
> (Except for a UDP problem I seem to remember I
Am 02.05.2007 09:52 schrieb Greg KH:
> Tilman, here's a patch, can you try this on top of your tree that dies?
2.6.21-git3 plus that patch comes up fine.
(Except for a UDP problem I seem to remember I already saw reported
on lkml and which I'll ignore for now in order not to blur the
picture.)
On 5/2/07, Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 12:10:00AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 02 May 2007 09:01:22 +0200 Tilman Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
> > > Not really - everything's tangled up. A bisection
On Wed, 2 May 2007 00:43:05 -0700, "Greg KH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > > And the winner is:
> > >
> > > gregkh-driver-driver-core-make-uevent-environment-available-in-uevent-file.patch
> > >
> > > Reverting only that from 2.6.21-rc7-mm2 gives me a working kernel
> > > again.
>
> Wait, even
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 12:10:00AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 02 May 2007 09:01:22 +0200 Tilman Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
> > > Not really - everything's tangled up. A bisection search on the
> > > 2.6.21-rc7-mm2 driver tree
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 12:10:00AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 02 May 2007 09:01:22 +0200 Tilman Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
> > > Not really - everything's tangled up. A bisection search on the
> > > 2.6.21-rc7-mm2 driver tree
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 12:10:00AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 02 May 2007 09:01:22 +0200 Tilman Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
> > > Not really - everything's tangled up. A bisection search on the
> > > 2.6.21-rc7-mm2 driver tree
On Wed, 02 May 2007 09:01:22 +0200 Tilman Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
> > Not really - everything's tangled up. A bisection search on the
> > 2.6.21-rc7-mm2 driver tree would be the best bet.
>
> And the winner is:
>
>
Tilman Schmidt wrote:
Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
Not really - everything's tangled up. A bisection search on the
2.6.21-rc7-mm2 driver tree would be the best bet.
And the winner is:
gregkh-driver-driver-core-make-uevent-environment-available-in-uevent-file.patch
+
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 09:01:22AM +0200, Tilman Schmidt wrote:
> Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
> > Not really - everything's tangled up. A bisection search on the
> > 2.6.21-rc7-mm2 driver tree would be the best bet.
>
> And the winner is:
>
>
Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
> Not really - everything's tangled up. A bisection search on the
> 2.6.21-rc7-mm2 driver tree would be the best bet.
And the winner is:
gregkh-driver-driver-core-make-uevent-environment-available-in-uevent-file.patch
Reverting only that from
Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
Not really - everything's tangled up. A bisection search on the
2.6.21-rc7-mm2 driver tree would be the best bet.
And the winner is:
gregkh-driver-driver-core-make-uevent-environment-available-in-uevent-file.patch
Reverting only that from
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 09:01:22AM +0200, Tilman Schmidt wrote:
Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
Not really - everything's tangled up. A bisection search on the
2.6.21-rc7-mm2 driver tree would be the best bet.
And the winner is:
On Wed, 02 May 2007 09:01:22 +0200 Tilman Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
Not really - everything's tangled up. A bisection search on the
2.6.21-rc7-mm2 driver tree would be the best bet.
And the winner is:
Tilman Schmidt wrote:
Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
Not really - everything's tangled up. A bisection search on the
2.6.21-rc7-mm2 driver tree would be the best bet.
And the winner is:
gregkh-driver-driver-core-make-uevent-environment-available-in-uevent-file.patch
+
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 12:10:00AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Wed, 02 May 2007 09:01:22 +0200 Tilman Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
Not really - everything's tangled up. A bisection search on the
2.6.21-rc7-mm2 driver tree would be the
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 12:10:00AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Wed, 02 May 2007 09:01:22 +0200 Tilman Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
Not really - everything's tangled up. A bisection search on the
2.6.21-rc7-mm2 driver tree would be the
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 12:10:00AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Wed, 02 May 2007 09:01:22 +0200 Tilman Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
Not really - everything's tangled up. A bisection search on the
2.6.21-rc7-mm2 driver tree would be the
On Wed, 2 May 2007 00:43:05 -0700, Greg KH [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
And the winner is:
gregkh-driver-driver-core-make-uevent-environment-available-in-uevent-file.patch
Reverting only that from 2.6.21-rc7-mm2 gives me a working kernel
again.
Wait, even though this isn't good,
On 5/2/07, Greg KH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 12:10:00AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Wed, 02 May 2007 09:01:22 +0200 Tilman Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
Not really - everything's tangled up. A bisection search on the
Am 02.05.2007 09:52 schrieb Greg KH:
Tilman, here's a patch, can you try this on top of your tree that dies?
2.6.21-git3 plus that patch comes up fine.
(Except for a UDP problem I seem to remember I already saw reported
on lkml and which I'll ignore for now in order not to blur the
picture.)
On Wed, 02 May 2007 19:36:03 +0200
Tilman Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am 02.05.2007 09:52 schrieb Greg KH:
Tilman, here's a patch, can you try this on top of your tree that dies?
2.6.21-git3 plus that patch comes up fine.
(Except for a UDP problem I seem to remember I already saw
Am 02.05.2007 22:07 schrieb Andrew Morton:
Started to git-bisect mainline now, but that will take some time.
[...]
I don't think there's much point in you doing that. We know what the bug is.
Good. Saves me some work. :-)
If you'd like me to test anything, just let me know.
Thanks,
Tilman
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 11:41:22AM +0200, Tilman Schmidt wrote:
On Wed, 2 May 2007 00:43:05 -0700, Greg KH [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
And the winner is:
gregkh-driver-driver-core-make-uevent-environment-available-in-uevent-file.patch
Reverting only that from 2.6.21-rc7-mm2
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 01:26:44PM +0200, Tilman Schmidt wrote:
> Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
> > Sure, but what about 2.6.21-git3 (or, better, current -git)?
>
> 2.6.21-git3 crashed with panic blink at "scanning usb: .."
> (Nothing in the log this time.)
Eeek, that's not good.
Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
> Sure, but what about 2.6.21-git3 (or, better, current -git)?
2.6.21-git3 crashed with panic blink at "scanning usb: .."
(Nothing in the log this time.)
Will continue bisecting -rc7-mm2.
HTH
T.
--
Tilman Schmidt E-Mail:
Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
Sure, but what about 2.6.21-git3 (or, better, current -git)?
2.6.21-git3 crashed with panic blink at scanning usb: ..
(Nothing in the log this time.)
Will continue bisecting -rc7-mm2.
HTH
T.
--
Tilman Schmidt E-Mail: [EMAIL
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 01:26:44PM +0200, Tilman Schmidt wrote:
Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
Sure, but what about 2.6.21-git3 (or, better, current -git)?
2.6.21-git3 crashed with panic blink at scanning usb: ..
(Nothing in the log this time.)
Eeek, that's not good.
Can you
Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
>> 2.6.21-final is fine.
>
> Sure, but what about 2.6.21-git3 (or, better, current -git)?
OIC. Sorry for being dense. Will check.
>>> If that's OK then we need to pick through the difference between
>>> 2.6.21-rc7-mm2's driver tree and the patches
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 21:28:06 +0200
Tilman Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Am 30.04.2007 20:21 schrieb Andrew Morton:
> > A lot of Greg's driver tree has gone upstream, so please check current
> > mainline.
>
> 2.6.21-final is fine.
Sure, but what about 2.6.21-git3 (or, better, current
Am 30.04.2007 20:21 schrieb Andrew Morton:
> A lot of Greg's driver tree has gone upstream, so please check current
> mainline.
2.6.21-final is fine.
> If that's OK then we need to pick through the difference between
> 2.6.21-rc7-mm2's driver tree and the patches which went into mainline. And
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 19:17:02 +0200
Tilman Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> With kernel 2.6.21-rc7-mm2, my Dell Optiplex GX110 (P3/933) regularly
> >> crashes during the SuSE 10.1 startup sequence. When booting to RL5,
> >> it panicblinks shortly after the graphical login screen appears.
>
>> With kernel 2.6.21-rc7-mm2, my Dell Optiplex GX110 (P3/933) regularly
>> crashes during the SuSE 10.1 startup sequence. When booting to RL5,
>> it panicblinks shortly after the graphical login screen appears.
>> Booting to RL3, it hangs after the startup message:
I have now bisected this down
With kernel 2.6.21-rc7-mm2, my Dell Optiplex GX110 (P3/933) regularly
crashes during the SuSE 10.1 startup sequence. When booting to RL5,
it panicblinks shortly after the graphical login screen appears.
Booting to RL3, it hangs after the startup message:
I have now bisected this down to the
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 19:17:02 +0200
Tilman Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With kernel 2.6.21-rc7-mm2, my Dell Optiplex GX110 (P3/933) regularly
crashes during the SuSE 10.1 startup sequence. When booting to RL5,
it panicblinks shortly after the graphical login screen appears.
Booting to
Am 30.04.2007 20:21 schrieb Andrew Morton:
A lot of Greg's driver tree has gone upstream, so please check current
mainline.
2.6.21-final is fine.
If that's OK then we need to pick through the difference between
2.6.21-rc7-mm2's driver tree and the patches which went into mainline. And
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 21:28:06 +0200
Tilman Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am 30.04.2007 20:21 schrieb Andrew Morton:
A lot of Greg's driver tree has gone upstream, so please check current
mainline.
2.6.21-final is fine.
Sure, but what about 2.6.21-git3 (or, better, current -git)?
If
Am 30.04.2007 21:46 schrieb Andrew Morton:
2.6.21-final is fine.
Sure, but what about 2.6.21-git3 (or, better, current -git)?
OIC. Sorry for being dense. Will check.
If that's OK then we need to pick through the difference between
2.6.21-rc7-mm2's driver tree and the patches which went
On Sat, 28 Apr 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> It seems wildly screwed up that we have a PageReserved() page with a pfn of
> zero (!) which claims to be in a reiserfs mapping, only it isn't attached
> to a reiserfs file. How the heck did that happen?
It's "simply" that it somehow got a spurious
ears.
> Booting to RL3, it hangs after the startup message:
>
> Starting Firewall Initialization (phase 2 of 2)
>
> (the last message before "runlevel 3 has been reached") logging this:
>
> [ 57.138955] Eeek! page_mapcount(page) went negative! (-1)
> [ 57.1390
of 2)
(the last message before "runlevel 3 has been reached") logging this:
[ 57.138955] Eeek! page_mapcount(page) went negative! (-1)
[ 57.139040] page pfn = 0
[ 57.139053] page->flags = 400
[ 57.139066] page->count = 1
[ 57.139079] page->mapping =
[
of 2)
(the last message before runlevel 3 has been reached) logging this:
[ 57.138955] Eeek! page_mapcount(page) went negative! (-1)
[ 57.139040] page pfn = 0
[ 57.139053] page-flags = 400
[ 57.139066] page-count = 1
[ 57.139079] page-mapping =
[ 57.139111] vma
, it hangs after the startup message:
Starting Firewall Initialization (phase 2 of 2)
(the last message before runlevel 3 has been reached) logging this:
[ 57.138955] Eeek! page_mapcount(page) went negative! (-1)
[ 57.139040] page pfn = 0
[ 57.139053] page-flags = 400
On Sat, 28 Apr 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
It seems wildly screwed up that we have a PageReserved() page with a pfn of
zero (!) which claims to be in a reiserfs mapping, only it isn't attached
to a reiserfs file. How the heck did that happen?
It's simply that it somehow got a spurious page
On Sun, 04 Feb 2007 22:10:58 -0800 David Liontooth wrote:
> Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > On Sun, 04 Feb 2007 20:48:30 -0800 David Liontooth wrote:
> >
> >
> >> David Liontooth wrote:
> >>
> >>>
...[snippage]
> >>>
> >> More from the same machine -- it really doesn't like the script,
On Sun, Feb 04, 2007 at 10:10:58PM -0800, David Liontooth wrote:
> > Two things:
> > a. Can you try a recent/current kernel to see if this happens?
> > b. The "Tainted: GF" means that a module was forcibly loaded.
> > What module was this? and is it compatible with a 2.6.16.38 kernel?
> >
On Sun, Feb 04, 2007 at 10:10:58PM -0800, David Liontooth wrote:
Two things:
a. Can you try a recent/current kernel to see if this happens?
b. The Tainted: GF means that a module was forcibly loaded.
What module was this? and is it compatible with a 2.6.16.38 kernel?
Can you
On Sun, 04 Feb 2007 22:10:58 -0800 David Liontooth wrote:
Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Sun, 04 Feb 2007 20:48:30 -0800 David Liontooth wrote:
David Liontooth wrote:
...[snippage]
More from the same machine -- it really doesn't like the script, which
simply does:
swap offset entry 00000080
>>> Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel: swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 0080
>>> Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel: Eeek! page_mapcount(page) went negative! (-1)
>>> Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel: page->flags = 100083c
>>
gt; > Feb 4 17:20:50 prato kernel: convert[23113]: segfault at
> > 8010 rip 2b0914f305aa rsp 7f984340 error 4
> >
> > Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel: swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 0080
> > Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel: swap_free: Unused swap
ff984340 error 4
>
> Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel: swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 0080
> Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel: swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 00000080
> Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel: Eeek! page_mapcount(page) went negative! (-1)
> Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel:
offset entry 0080
Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel: swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 0080
Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel: Eeek! page_mapcount(page) went negative! (-1)
Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel: page->flags = 100083c
Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel: page->count = 2
Feb 4 17:50:57
offset entry 0080
Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel: swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 0080
Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel: Eeek! page_mapcount(page) went negative! (-1)
Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel: page-flags = 100083c
Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel: page-count = 2
Feb 4 17:50:57 prato
kernel: swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 0080
Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel: swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 0080
Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel: Eeek! page_mapcount(page) went negative! (-1)
Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel: page-flags = 100083c
Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel
2b0914f305aa rsp 7f984340 error 4
Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel: swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 0080
Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel: swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 0080
Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel: Eeek! page_mapcount(page) went negative! (-1)
Feb 4 17:50:57 prato
at
8010 rip 2b0914f305aa rsp 7f984340 error 4
Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel: swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 0080
Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel: swap_free: Unused swap offset entry 0080
Feb 4 17:50:57 prato kernel: Eeek! page_mapcount(page) went negative! (-1)
Feb 4
75 matches
Mail list logo
