lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Dec]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [BUG] 2.6.24-rc3-git2 softlockup detected
On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 12:58:06 +0530
Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 23:00:47 -0800 Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 01:39:29 -0500 Kyle McMartin <kyle@mcmartin.ca> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 12:35:33AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >>>> ten million is close enough to infinity for me to assume that we broke the
> >>>> driver and that's never going to terminate.
> >>>>
> >>> how about this? doesn't break things on my pa8800:
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/sym53c8xx_2/sym_hipd.c b/drivers/scsi/sym53c8xx_2/sym_hipd.c
> >>> index 463f119..ef01cb1 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/scsi/sym53c8xx_2/sym_hipd.c
> >>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/sym53c8xx_2/sym_hipd.c
> >>> @@ -1037,10 +1037,13 @@ restart_test:
> >>> /*
> >>> * Wait 'til done (with timeout)
> >>> */
> >>> - for (i=0; i<SYM_SNOOP_TIMEOUT; i++)
> >>> + do {
> >>> if (INB(np, nc_istat) & (INTF|SIP|DIP))
> >>> break;
> >>> - if (i>=SYM_SNOOP_TIMEOUT) {
> >>> + msleep(10);
> >>> + } while (i++ < SYM_SNOOP_TIMEOUT);
> >>> +
> >>> + if (i >= SYM_SNOOP_TIMEOUT) {
> >>> printf ("CACHE TEST FAILED: timeout.\n");
> >>> return (0x20);
> >>> }
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/sym53c8xx_2/sym_hipd.h b/drivers/scsi/sym53c8xx_2/sym_hipd.h
> >>> index ad07880..85c483b 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/scsi/sym53c8xx_2/sym_hipd.h
> >>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/sym53c8xx_2/sym_hipd.h
> >>> @@ -339,7 +339,7 @@
> >>> /*
> >>> * Misc.
> >>> */
> >>> -#define SYM_SNOOP_TIMEOUT (10000000)
> >>> +#define SYM_SNOOP_TIMEOUT (1000)
> >>> #define BUS_8_BIT 0
> >>> #define BUS_16_BIT 1
> >>>
> >> That might be the fix, but do we know what we're actually fixing? afaik
> >> 2.6.24-rc3 doesn't get this timeout, 2.6.24-rc3-mm2 does get it and we
> >> don't know why?
> >>
> >
> > <looks at Subject:>
> >
> > <Checks that Rafael was cc'ed>
> >
> > So 2.6.24-rc3 was OK and 2.6.24-rc3-git2 is not?
>
> Yes, the 2.6.24-rc3 was Ok and this is seen from 2.6.24-rc3-git2/3/4.
>

There are effectively no drivers/scsi/ changes after 2.6.24-rc3 and we
don't (I believe) have a clue what caused this regression.

Can you please do a bisection search on this?

Thanks.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-12-03 22:15    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site