Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...>, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...>, <linux-usb@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, <linux-mm@...>, James Morris <jmorris@...>, Stephen Smalley <sds@...>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...>, <linux-pm@...>, Greg KH <greg@...>, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...>, Pavel Machek <pavel@...>
Date: Friday, April 18, 2008 - 3:57 am

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 00:53:23 -0700 Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:


I found another machine!  This one's an old 4-way Nocona (x86_64)

http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/config-x.txt
http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/dmesg-x.txt



CPU: Physical Processor ID: 0
CPU: Processor Core ID: 0
CPU0: Thermal monitoring enabled (TM1)
ACPI: Core revision 20080321
Parsing all Control Methods:
Table [DSDT](id 0001) - 461 Objects with 50 Devices 130 Methods 11 Regions
 tbxface-0598 [00] tb_load_namespace     : ACPI Tables successfully acquired
evxfevnt-0091 [00] enable                : Transition to ACPI mode successful
------------[ cut here ]------------
WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/genapic_64.c:86 read_apic_id+0x31/0x67()
Modules linked in:
Pid: 1, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.25-mm1 #16

Call Trace:
 [<ffffffff8025272f>] ? print_modules+0x88/0x8f
 [<ffffffff80233493>] warn_on_slowpath+0x58/0x81
 [<ffffffff80351ceb>] ? debug_spin_lock_after+0x18/0x1f
 [<ffffffff8035217a>] ? _raw_spin_lock+0x116/0x120
 [<ffffffff80228398>] ? sub_preempt_count+0x6d/0x74
 [<ffffffff804e9ba3>] ? _spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x33/0x40
 [<ffffffff803523e6>] ? debug_smp_processor_id+0x32/0xc4
 [<ffffffff8021ede5>] read_apic_id+0x31/0x67
 [<ffffffff8066f7f2>] verify_local_APIC+0xa7/0x163
 [<ffffffff8066e837>] native_smp_prepare_cpus+0x1ed/0x301
 [<ffffffff80669ab2>] kernel_init+0x5a/0x276
 [<ffffffff804e9a1e>] ? _spin_unlock_irq+0x2a/0x35
 [<ffffffff8022b7c2>] ? finish_task_switch+0x68/0x7f
 [<ffffffff8020c1d8>] child_rip+0xa/0x12
 [<ffffffff80669a58>] ? kernel_init+0x0/0x276
 [<ffffffff8020c1ce>] ? child_rip+0x0/0x12

---[ end trace 4eaa2a86a8e2da22 ]---
------------[ cut here ]------------
WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/genapic_64.c:86 read_apic_id+0x31/0x67()
Modules linked in:
Pid: 1, comm: swapper Tainted: G        W 2.6.25-mm1 #16

Call Trace:
 [<ffffffff8025272f>] ? print_modules+0x88/0x8f
 [<ffffffff80233493>] warn_on_slowpath+0x58/0x81
 [<ffffffff80351ceb>] ? debug_spin_lock_after+0x18/0x1f
 [<ffffffff8035217a>] ? _raw_spin_lock+0x116/0x120
 [<ffffffff80228398>] ? sub_preempt_count+0x6d/0x74
 [<ffffffff804e9ba3>] ? _spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x33/0x40
 [<ffffffff803523e6>] ? debug_smp_processor_id+0x32/0xc4
 [<ffffffff8021ede5>] read_apic_id+0x31/0x67
 [<ffffffff8066f829>] verify_local_APIC+0xde/0x163
 [<ffffffff8066e837>] native_smp_prepare_cpus+0x1ed/0x301
 [<ffffffff80669ab2>] kernel_init+0x5a/0x276
 [<ffffffff804e9a1e>] ? _spin_unlock_irq+0x2a/0x35
 [<ffffffff8022b7c2>] ? finish_task_switch+0x68/0x7f
 [<ffffffff8020c1d8>] child_rip+0xa/0x12
 [<ffffffff80669a58>] ? kernel_init+0x0/0x276
 [<ffffffff8020c1ce>] ? child_rip+0x0/0x12

---[ end trace 4eaa2a86a8e2da22 ]---

That's

	WARN_ON(preemptible());

in read_apic_id().


Now I'll release it all.  heh.
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Thu Apr 17, 7:03 pm)
2.6.25-mm1: Failing to probe IDE interface, Mel Gorman, (Mon Apr 28, 12:42 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: Failing to probe IDE interface, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz..., (Mon Apr 28, 2:44 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: Failing to probe IDE interface, Mel Gorman, (Tue Apr 29, 5:43 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: Failing to probe IDE interface, Mel Gorman, (Tue Apr 29, 11:49 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: Failing to probe IDE interface, Mel Gorman, (Tue Apr 29, 12:58 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: Failing to probe IDE interface, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz..., (Tue Apr 29, 5:37 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: Failing to probe IDE interface, Mel Gorman, (Wed Apr 30, 7:16 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: Failing to probe IDE interface, Andrew Morton, (Mon Apr 28, 12:59 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: Failing to probe IDE interface, Mel Gorman, (Tue Apr 29, 5:39 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Fri Apr 18, 3:50 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Fri Apr 18, 3:53 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Pavel Machek, (Fri Apr 18, 7:07 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Pavel Machek, (Fri Apr 18, 5:42 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Alan Stern, (Fri Apr 18, 11:22 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Fri Apr 18, 3:57 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Ingo Molnar, (Fri Apr 18, 5:22 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Ingo Molnar, (Fri Apr 18, 8:18 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Ingo Molnar, (Fri Apr 18, 3:09 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Pekka Enberg, (Fri Apr 18, 2:40 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Ingo Molnar, (Fri Apr 18, 3:24 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, James Morris, (Fri Apr 18, 6:32 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Pekka Enberg, (Fri Apr 18, 3:25 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Fri Apr 18, 2:56 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Arjan van de Ven, (Fri Apr 18, 1:49 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Fri Apr 18, 2:10 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Ingo Molnar, (Fri Apr 18, 3:19 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Fri Apr 18, 3:28 am)
Re: Stack protector build failure (was Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not l..., Arjan van de Ven, (Fri Apr 18, 12:57 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Ingo Molnar, (Fri Apr 18, 5:28 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Paul Moore, (Thu Apr 17, 7:55 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Thu Apr 17, 9:35 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Paul Moore, (Fri Apr 18, 10:57 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Thu Apr 17, 8:04 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Paul Moore, (Fri Apr 18, 10:55 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Thu Apr 17, 7:40 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Thu Apr 17, 8:14 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Jason Wessel, (Thu Apr 17, 11:05 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Ingo Molnar, (Fri Apr 18, 3:37 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Jason Wessel, (Fri Apr 18, 5:54 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Vegard Nossum, (Fri Apr 18, 7:46 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Ingo Molnar, (Fri Apr 18, 8:34 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Vegard Nossum, (Fri Apr 18, 8:41 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Jason Wessel, (Fri Apr 18, 9:02 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Vegard Nossum, (Fri Apr 18, 9:22 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Jason Wessel, (Fri Apr 18, 9:27 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Vegard Nossum, (Fri Apr 18, 10:47 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Vegard Nossum, (Fri Apr 18, 12:02 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Greg KH, (Thu Apr 17, 7:24 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Kay Sievers, (Thu Apr 17, 8:48 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Fri Apr 18, 12:07 am)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Andrew Morton, (Thu Apr 17, 9:12 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-mm1: not looking good, Dan Williams, (Thu Apr 17, 7:24 pm)