Paul Collins wrote:
Michael Ellerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Also, how old is the machine? Any chance you're just seeing random
memory corruption?
It's about four years old. It was in storage for about six months and I
got it repaired a few weeks ago (display cable and inverter). The
On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 17:16 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 16:47 +1200, Paul Collins wrote:
It's about four years old. It was in storage for about six months and I
got it repaired a few weeks ago (display cable and inverter). The sort
of crazy crap I've been
On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 16:47 +1200, Paul Collins wrote:
It's about four years old. It was in storage for about six months and I
got it repaired a few weeks ago (display cable and inverter). The sort
of crazy crap I've been reporting certainly smacks of memory corruption.
But on the other
Michael Ellerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I see you have FTRACE enabled. That's new and could potentially bugger
things up without the compiler knowing, so can you turn that off.
With FTRACE disabled, doing cross-builds from the 2.6.26 amd64 client, a
setup that normally triggers the problem
On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 21:43 +1200, Paul Collins wrote:
Michael Ellerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I see you have FTRACE enabled. That's new and could potentially bugger
things up without the compiler knowing, so can you turn that off.
With FTRACE disabled, doing cross-builds from the
Paul Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Could you try removing the 'static' declaration for nfsd_acceptable
and recompile?
Or maybe try a different compiler?
I will give these a try this evening.
I built myself a nice new cross compiler:
On Mon, 2008-08-04 at 22:00 +1200, Paul Collins wrote:
Paul Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Could you try removing the 'static' declaration for nfsd_acceptable
and recompile?
Or maybe try a different compiler?
I will give these a try this
Michael Ellerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 2008-08-04 at 22:00 +1200, Paul Collins wrote:
Paul Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Could you try removing the 'static' declaration for nfsd_acceptable
and recompile?
Or maybe try a different
On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 08:51:23AM +1200, Paul Collins wrote:
Michael Ellerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 2008-08-04 at 22:00 +1200, Paul Collins wrote:
Paul Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Could you try removing the 'static'
On Mon, 2008-08-04 at 16:59 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 08:51:23AM +1200, Paul Collins wrote:
Michael Ellerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 2008-08-04 at 22:00 +1200, Paul Collins wrote:
Paul Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Neil Brown [EMAIL
Michael Ellerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 2008-08-04 at 16:59 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 08:51:23AM +1200, Paul Collins wrote:
Michael Ellerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 2008-08-04 at 22:00 +1200, Paul Collins wrote:
Paul Collins [EMAIL
On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 15:43 +1200, Paul Collins wrote:
Michael Ellerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 2008-08-04 at 16:59 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 08:51:23AM +1200, Paul Collins wrote:
Michael Ellerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 2008-08-04
Michael Ellerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 15:43 +1200, Paul Collins wrote:
Michael Ellerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think may be able to rule NFS out now. I just got this Oops when Xorg
started on boot.
Cool, that looks fairly convincing.
In case anyone wants
Paul Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
J. Bruce Fields [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, Aug 03, 2008 at 12:03:18AM +1200, Paul Collins wrote:
I just got the oops below on a ppc32 NFS4 server. I was cross-compiling
Linux with an amd64 client at the time. The server is running Linus's
tree
On Sunday August 3, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can trigger it reliably with a 2.6.26 client. I've also triggered it
with 496d6c32d4d057cb44272d9bd587ff97d023ee92 reverted on the server.
It's harder to trigger with 2.6.27-rc1+ but I managed to get an Oops
on the fourth build after three
Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sunday August 3, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can trigger it reliably with a 2.6.26 client. I've also triggered it
with 496d6c32d4d057cb44272d9bd587ff97d023ee92 reverted on the server.
It's harder to trigger with 2.6.27-rc1+ but I managed to get an
On Monday August 4, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What filesystem is being exported here?
Boring old ext3 (on LVM, on dm-crypt).
Good. That makes it easier.
Can you get an assembly version of exportfs_decode_fh, so we can check
what is happening at
Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
bctrl appears to be the indirect-function-call opcode. There are
three of them one each for
-fh_to_dentry
acceptable
-fh_to_parent
0xa8 is 'acceptable'.
In the first traceback, the crash was a call from very early in
find_acceptable_alias,
I just got the oops below on a ppc32 NFS4 server. I was cross-compiling
Linux with an amd64 client at the time. The server is running Linus's
tree as of 94ad374a0751f40d25e22e036c37f7263569d24c, the client is
running 2.6.26.
The server's kernel was cross-compiled with gcc 4.2.4-3 and binutils
On Sun, Aug 03, 2008 at 12:03:18AM +1200, Paul Collins wrote:
I just got the oops below on a ppc32 NFS4 server. I was cross-compiling
Linux with an amd64 client at the time. The server is running Linus's
tree as of 94ad374a0751f40d25e22e036c37f7263569d24c, the client is
running 2.6.26.
20 matches
Mail list logo
