Hi,
> Yes. With that patch applied, things work for me again.
Thanks Alex, Nish. We can reproduce this on one of our Biminis, looking
into it now.
Anton
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More
Hi,
Yes. With that patch applied, things work for me again.
Thanks Alex, Nish. We can reproduce this on one of our Biminis, looking
into it now.
Anton
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo
On Tue, 2012-10-02 at 14:43 -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
>
> Started looking into this. If your suspicion were accurate, wouldn't
> the
> bisection have stopped at 0e4bc95d87394364f408627067238453830bdbf3
> ("powerpc/iommu: Reduce spinlock coverage in iommu_alloc and
> iommu_free")?
>
>
On 03.10.2012, at 00:17, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> On 02.10.2012 [23:47:39 +0200], Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>> On 02.10.2012, at 23:43, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Ben,
>>>
>>> On 02.10.2012 [10:58:29 +1000], Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Mon, 2012-10-01 at 16:03 +0200,
On 02.10.2012 [23:47:39 +0200], Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 02.10.2012, at 23:43, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
>
> > Hi Ben,
> >
> > On 02.10.2012 [10:58:29 +1000], Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2012-10-01 at 16:03 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >>> Phew. Here we go :). It looks to
On 02.10.2012, at 23:43, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> Hi Ben,
>
> On 02.10.2012 [10:58:29 +1000], Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>> On Mon, 2012-10-01 at 16:03 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>> Phew. Here we go :). It looks to be more of a PPC specific problem
>>> than it appeared as at first:
>>
Hi Ben,
On 02.10.2012 [10:58:29 +1000], Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-10-01 at 16:03 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> > Phew. Here we go :). It looks to be more of a PPC specific problem
> > than it appeared as at first:
>
> Ok, so I suspect the problem is the pushing down of the
Hi Ben,
On 02.10.2012 [10:58:29 +1000], Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Mon, 2012-10-01 at 16:03 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
Phew. Here we go :). It looks to be more of a PPC specific problem
than it appeared as at first:
Ok, so I suspect the problem is the pushing down of the locks
On 02.10.2012, at 23:43, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
Hi Ben,
On 02.10.2012 [10:58:29 +1000], Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Mon, 2012-10-01 at 16:03 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
Phew. Here we go :). It looks to be more of a PPC specific problem
than it appeared as at first:
Ok, so I
On 02.10.2012 [23:47:39 +0200], Alexander Graf wrote:
On 02.10.2012, at 23:43, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
Hi Ben,
On 02.10.2012 [10:58:29 +1000], Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Mon, 2012-10-01 at 16:03 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
Phew. Here we go :). It looks to be more of a PPC
On 03.10.2012, at 00:17, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
On 02.10.2012 [23:47:39 +0200], Alexander Graf wrote:
On 02.10.2012, at 23:43, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
Hi Ben,
On 02.10.2012 [10:58:29 +1000], Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Mon, 2012-10-01 at 16:03 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
On Tue, 2012-10-02 at 14:43 -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
Started looking into this. If your suspicion were accurate, wouldn't
the
bisection have stopped at 0e4bc95d87394364f408627067238453830bdbf3
(powerpc/iommu: Reduce spinlock coverage in iommu_alloc and
iommu_free)?
Alex, the
On Mon, 2012-10-01 at 16:03 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> Phew. Here we go :). It looks to be more of a PPC specific problem than it
> appeared as at first:
Ok, so I suspect the problem is the pushing down of the locks which
breaks with iommu backends that have a separate flush callback. In
On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 04:03:06PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 28.09.2012, at 17:10, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 04:19:55AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >>
> >> On 28.09.2012, at 04:04, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 6:55 PM,
On 28.09.2012, at 17:10, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 04:19:55AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>> On 28.09.2012, at 04:04, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 6:55 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
Below are OOPS excerpts from different rc's I tried.
On 28.09.2012, at 17:10, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 04:19:55AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 28.09.2012, at 04:04, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 6:55 PM, Alexander Graf ag...@suse.de wrote:
Below are OOPS excerpts from different rc's I tried. All
On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 04:03:06PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 28.09.2012, at 17:10, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 04:19:55AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 28.09.2012, at 04:04, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 6:55 PM, Alexander Graf
On Mon, 2012-10-01 at 16:03 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
Phew. Here we go :). It looks to be more of a PPC specific problem than it
appeared as at first:
Ok, so I suspect the problem is the pushing down of the locks which
breaks with iommu backends that have a separate flush callback. In
that
On 28.09.2012, at 17:10, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 04:19:55AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>> On 28.09.2012, at 04:04, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 6:55 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
Below are OOPS excerpts from different rc's I tried.
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 04:19:55AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> On 28.09.2012, at 04:04, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 6:55 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >>
> >> Below are OOPS excerpts from different rc's I tried. All of them crashed -
> >> all the way up to current
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 04:19:55AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 28.09.2012, at 04:04, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 6:55 PM, Alexander Graf ag...@suse.de wrote:
Below are OOPS excerpts from different rc's I tried. All of them crashed -
all the way up to current
On 28.09.2012, at 17:10, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 04:19:55AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 28.09.2012, at 04:04, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 6:55 PM, Alexander Graf ag...@suse.de wrote:
Below are OOPS excerpts from different rc's I tried. All
On 28.09.2012, at 04:04, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 6:55 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>> Below are OOPS excerpts from different rc's I tried. All of them crashed -
>> all the way up to current Linus' master branch. I haven't cross-checked, but
>> I don't remember any
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 6:55 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
> Below are OOPS excerpts from different rc's I tried. All of them crashed -
> all the way up to current Linus' master branch. I haven't cross-checked, but
> I don't remember any such behavior from pre-3.6 releases.
Since you seem to be
Howdy,
While running 3.6.0-rcX I am having a few issues with nfsd on my PPC970 based
system. For some reason every time I actually end up accessing an NFS share on
it, it crashes away at random points. It looks a lot like corrupted pointers in
all logs. I also can't reproduce the oopses
Howdy,
While running 3.6.0-rcX I am having a few issues with nfsd on my PPC970 based
system. For some reason every time I actually end up accessing an NFS share on
it, it crashes away at random points. It looks a lot like corrupted pointers in
all logs. I also can't reproduce the oopses
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 6:55 PM, Alexander Graf ag...@suse.de wrote:
Below are OOPS excerpts from different rc's I tried. All of them crashed -
all the way up to current Linus' master branch. I haven't cross-checked, but
I don't remember any such behavior from pre-3.6 releases.
Since you
On 28.09.2012, at 04:04, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 6:55 PM, Alexander Graf ag...@suse.de wrote:
Below are OOPS excerpts from different rc's I tried. All of them crashed -
all the way up to current Linus' master branch. I haven't cross-checked, but
I don't remember any
28 matches
Mail list logo
