>
> [Posted and mailed]
>
> In article <861ztiq1x8.fsf@os.inf.tu-dresden.de>,
> Jean Wolter <jw5@os.inf.tu-dresden.de> writes:
> > I think it would be a good idea to apply the patches I have sent to
> > the list and try to find the real problem for the Ugh messages. You
> > seem to have a reliable way to trigger them, so why don't you try to
> > find the reason for them, so that someone can fix the kernel?
>
> I applied your patch for additional Ugh-debugging and recompiled the
> kernel with SMP=1 commented out. The box is running for three days now
> without any ugh-choking, so it seems the ughs were really caused by
> the SMP kernel on my UP system.
>
> -- Andreas
>
Hmm, if you replace 'caused' with 'detected' then the last sentence is
correct. The patch I have sent to the list modified the sequence that
detects the ugh to provide additional information (call trace) about
it.
If you run an UP kernel nobody even checks for an ugh (and therefore
no additional output is generated), but they can still happen. So the
idea was to apply the patches, compile and run an SMP kernel, trigger
an ugh and report the resulting output from your syslog.
Jean
-- I get up each morning, gather my wits. Pick up the paper, read the obits. if I'm not there I know I'm not dead. So I eat a good breakfast and go back to bed. Peete Seeger- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu