From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265464AbTLHQbf (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Dec 2003 11:31:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265480AbTLHQ3C (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Dec 2003 11:29:02 -0500 Received: from ns.int.pl ([212.106.140.230]:27657 "EHLO novacom.pl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265464AbTLHQ0m (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Dec 2003 11:26:42 -0500 Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 17:27:32 +0100 From: Rafal Skoczylas To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20031208162732.GC9087@secprog.org> Reply-To: Rafal Skoczylas Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Dec 07, 2003 at 09:17:35PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, 8 Dec 2003, Rafal Skoczylas wrote: > > Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address 5a85fb5c > > [...] > > EIP: 0060:[remove_wait_queue+36/112] Not tainted > > [...] > > eax: defb4000 ebx: da85fb58 ecx: 5a85fb58 edx: db0468b0 > > esi: db0468bc edi: 00000292 ebp: defb5fa0 esp: defb5f58 > > Trace: > > [poll_freewait+36/80] poll_freewait+0x24/0x50 > > [sys_poll+581/656] sys_poll+0x245/0x290 > > [__pollwait+0/208] __pollwait+0x0/0xd0 > > [syscall_call+7/11] syscall_call+0x7/0xb > > It could be bad memory. We even know the address that is bad: it's > (%esi+4), ie bit 31 of the word at physical address 0x1b0468f0. > However, if you don't see random SIGSEGV's while compiling etc issues, it > doesnt' sound like flaky RAM. Indeed, I do not have any random SIGSEGVs at any time. Additionaly, as what you said sounded right to me I performed extensive memory tests with x86-memtest v3.0 during the night and as I expected memory seems to be OK. > Rafal - how consistent is the second form of the oops? > Have you seen that trace more than once? Not exactly the same, but there are some similarities (If I understand this log correctly). I ripped those oopses out of the logs so maybe you could look yourself and see something I don't see: http://secprog.org/who/rs/linux/2.6-test11-log.txt These are oopses I have experienced on test11 (Unfortunately, I dont have logs from test9 since I don't keep logs that long on workstation). nils. -- "Blessed is the man, who having nothing to say, abstains from giving wordy evidence of the fact." -- http://secprog.org/who/rs/quote.php?id=1