--
Rob. (Robert de Bath <http://poboxes.com/rdebath>)
<rdebath @ poboxes.com> <http://www.cix.co.uk/~mayday>
On Sat, 31 Jul 1999, Peter Amstutz wrote:
> Linux seems to be extremely unstable on my hardware. This seems to be a
> recent problem, I have tried 2.2.9, 2.2.10 and 2.2.11pre2 in an attempt at
> a stable system, but to no avail. My hardware specs:
>
> Tyan Tomcat IIID with SMP Pentium 200's
> NE2000 clone ethernet card
> ISA Sound Blaster 32
> 2 GB and 4 GB IDE hard disk, floppy, IDE CD-ROM
> Diamond Stealth 3D 2000, Diamond Monster 3D
>
> Everything boots up fine, and usually works properly for an hour or two,
> maybe more. Then it seems that almost always the system eventually hard
> locks. No telnet, no ping, no sysreq keys, nothing. Dead to the world.
> So I have to reboot, fsck, etc... It's incredibly frustrating.
>
> However, sometimes it doesn't die all at once. Several times I have run
> into this: a few processes die on segfault (if I'm in X their windows
> dissapear), then usually X dies and I'm dropped to the console.
> Everything seems to be going alright, but within a few moments the system
> dies completly. It seemed like when I try going to another virtual
> console to log in caused system to ultimatly crash, but it could just be
> coincidence. This exactly has happened on two seperate occasions, and the
> system has just straight hardlocked (no wierd process death first) at
> least half the time I've turned it on this week. Other times it has died
> in screensaver (with the screesaver segfaulted...) Fortunatly I'm not
> relying on this system for serious uptime, but it's beginning to really
> get in the way of even normal usage, and Linux isn't supposed to crash,
> right? :)
>
> I've checked my logs and they don't seem to log anything. There is some
> info in the debug log about pin/irq mapping which I can send if that might
> have anything to do with anything...
>
> Anyway, any suggestions would be _greatly_ appreciated. It feels like
> I've used 2.1.x kernels more stable than these 2.2.x kernels... In fact
> I'm probably going to try going back to 2.1.124 or so just to see if it's
> any better, but it would make a little more sense for the stable kernels
> to be stable, right? It's quite frustrating.
>
> Please reply by personal mail if possible, there's too much traffic on
> linux-kernel for anyone but the dedicated kernel hacker to monitor
> easily...
>
> ------------------ Peter Amstutz --------------------
> -------------- tetron@student.umass.edu -------------
> ------- http://www-unix.oit.umass.edu/~tetron -------
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/