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    [W:0.026 / U:59.320 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site