Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [BUG] i386 2.6.18 cpu_up: attempt to bring up CPU 4 failed : kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:2698! | From | keith mannthey <> | Date | Thu, 21 Sep 2006 19:31:00 -0700 |
| |
On Thu, 2006-09-21 at 18:34 -0700, keith mannthey wrote: > On Thu, 2006-09-21 at 17:41 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 17:17:31 -0700 > > keith mannthey <kmannth@us.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > > I wanted to just give 2.6.18 a spin and I tripped over something I > > > didn't expect. > > > > > > > > > cpu_up: attempt to bring up CPU 4 failed > > > kfree_debugcheck: bad ptr c15f6000h. > > > ------------[ cut here ]------------ > > > kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:2698! > > > invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] > > > SMP > > > Modules linked in: > > > CPU: 0 > > > EIP: 0060:[<c106ce51>] Not tainted VLI > > > EFLAGS: 00010046 (2.6.18 #1) > > > EIP is at kfree_debugcheck+0x7f/0x90 > > > eax: 00000028 ebx: 000015f6 ecx: c1025289 edx: c7653540 > > > esi: c15f6000 edi: c15f6000 ebp: c764af38 esp: c764af28 > > > ds: 007b es: 007b ss: 0068 > > > Process swapper (pid: 1, ti=c764a000 task=c7653540 task.ti=c764a000) > > > Stack: c122c68d c15f6000 c1635000 00000004 c764af5c c106ef93 00000286 > > > c76a77d0 > > > 00000004 00000001 c1635000 00000004 00000004 c764af6c c10557f6 > > > c1274eac > > > c12743dc c764af84 c1207467 00000004 c12734c0 00000004 00000004 > > > c764af98 > > > Call Trace: > > > [<c106ef93>] kfree+0x24/0x1d8 > > > [<c10557f6>] pageset_cpuup_callback+0x40/0x58 > > > [<c1207467>] notifier_call_chain+0x20/0x31 > > > [<c1031530>] blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x1d/0x2d > > > [<c103f80c>] cpu_up+0xb5/0xcf > > > [<c1000372>] init+0x78/0x296 > > > [<c1002005>] kernel_thread_helper+0x5/0xb > > > > I think we have two problems here: > > > > a) CPU4 didn't come up. To diagnose that I think we'll need to ask you > > to into cpu_up(), add debug printks to blocking_notifier_call_chain(), > > work out which entry on that chain returned NOTIFY_BAD, then work out > > why it did so. > > That unhappy caller in the chain is cpuup_callback in mm/slab.c. I am > still working out as to why, there is a lot going on if this function.
I think is is an odd NUMA case. The kernel is NUMA but it boots with only 1 node (even though there are 2) I don't think the vm is getting setup correctly in the i386 faking node code or some logic with respect to i386 numa in this situation.
I applied one of the patches I need to see the SRAT with (I will send this along in a proper email shortly)
Which caused there to be 2 nodes in the system and I didn't panic during boot.
So works CONFIG_NUMA with 2 nodes srat discovering
Number of logical nodes in system = 2 Number of memory chunks in system = 2 chunk 0 nid 0 start_pfn 00000000 end_pfn 000f0000 chunk 1 nid 0 start_pfn 00100000 end_pfn 001d0000 Node: 0, start_pfn: 0, end_pfn: 1900544 Node: 1, start_pfn: 0, end_pfn: 0 Reserving 24576 pages of KVA for lmem_map of node 0 Shrinking node 0 from 1900544 pages to 1875968 pages Reserving 0 pages of KVA for lmem_map of node 1 Shrinking node 1 from 0 pages to 0 pages Reserving total of 24576 pages for numa KVA remap reserve_pages = 24576 find_max_low_pfn() ~ 229376 max_pfn = 1900544 6624MB HIGHMEM available. 800MB LOWMEM available. min_low_pfn = 5685, max_low_pfn = 204800, highstart_pfn = 204800
(Yea there in no memory in the 2nd node but it still boots)
CONFIG_NUMA with 2 nodes but srat aborting the numa Discover and
failed to get NUMA memory information from SRAT table NUMA - single node, flat memory mode Node: 0, start_pfn: 0, end_pfn: 156 Node: 0, start_pfn: 256, end_pfn: 982929 Node: 0, start_pfn: 1048576, end_pfn: 1900544 Node: 0, start_pfn: 0, end_pfn: 1900544 Reserving 512 pages of KVA for lmem_map of node 0 Shrinking node 0 from 1900544 pages to 1900032 pages Reserving total of 512 pages for numa KVA remap reserve_pages = 512 find_max_low_pfn() ~ 229376 max_pfn = 1900544 6530MB HIGHMEM available. 894MB LOWMEM available. min_low_pfn = 5685, max_low_pfn = 228864, highstart_pfn = 228864
Hmm this puts us into a situation where the VM thinks there is 1 node but the cpus think there are 2. I am guessing this it the main issue and the source of the panic.
Thanks, Keith
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |