* [parisc-linux] Re: Expect defunct, kill -9 panics kernel?
[not found] <119aab440702100916q504101b1xe99f65ff5945e712@mail.gmail.com>
@ 2007-02-10 18:10 ` John David Anglin
2007-02-10 18:35 ` [parisc-linux] " James Bottomley
1 sibling, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: John David Anglin @ 2007-02-10 18:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Carlos O'Donell; +Cc: dave.anglin, parisc-linux
> Is this the usual behaviour you see?
>
> 1. I run the gcc testsuite.
> 2. expect dies, leaving a defunct process.
> 3. Killing another expect panics the kernel.
It similar to the behavior that I see. I don't usually see this
with expect though. Possibly, this is because I use my own build
of expect linked tcl8.3.
I see this behavior quite consistently on my c3750 if I
1. Run the gcc libjava testsuite.
2. Usually, there a set of processes (e.g., Process_3) left running
after the testsuite ends. These processes are not defunct and
load the processor. I can kill all but the oldest thread.
3. Killing the oldest thread panics the kernel. Sometimes the system
reboots. However, the system often hangs doing endless panics.
I suspect a timing issue as the c3750 is the fastest processor that
I test on. I don't see as many problems with the libjava testsuite
on slower hardware. At one time, I thought this might be a 32 versus
64-bit issue, but I see the same problems running a 64-bit kernel.
Dave
--
J. David Anglin dave.anglin@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca
National Research Council of Canada (613) 990-0752 (FAX: 952-6602)
_______________________________________________
parisc-linux mailing list
parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org
http://lists.parisc-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/parisc-linux
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: [parisc-linux] Expect defunct, kill -9 panics kernel?
[not found] <119aab440702100916q504101b1xe99f65ff5945e712@mail.gmail.com>
2007-02-10 18:10 ` [parisc-linux] Re: Expect defunct, kill -9 panics kernel? John David Anglin
@ 2007-02-10 18:35 ` James Bottomley
1 sibling, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: James Bottomley @ 2007-02-10 18:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Carlos O'Donell; +Cc: John David Anglin, parisc-linux
On Sat, 2007-02-10 at 12:16 -0500, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> At what point in the process life are we in __wake_up and
> __wake_up_common?
> An address of 0x10 is very suspicious.
Almost every internal kernel event or semaphore uses these.
Because of the empty backtrace, I'd be inclined to say it was the
scheduler, possibly.
0x10 looks to be curr->func implying curr is NULL and thus the queue
task_list is corrupt.
That's the best I can do without the kernel to pull apart.
James
_______________________________________________
parisc-linux mailing list
parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org
http://lists.parisc-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/parisc-linux
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-02-10 18:35 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <119aab440702100916q504101b1xe99f65ff5945e712@mail.gmail.com>
2007-02-10 18:10 ` [parisc-linux] Re: Expect defunct, kill -9 panics kernel? John David Anglin
2007-02-10 18:35 ` [parisc-linux] " James Bottomley
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.