Re: Lock-up on PPC64

[malc]

On Mon, 5 Jan 2009, Michael Ellerman wrote:

> On Sun, 2008-12-28 at 03:45 +0300, malc wrote:
> > On Thu, 25 Dec 2008, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 2008-12-24 at 03:08 +0300, malc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > > Ken Moffat <zarniwhoop@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 06:04:45AM +0300, malc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >
> > [..snip..]
[..snip..]

> > Now to the Christmas cheer, i've tried v2.6.28 and couldn't help but
> > notice that the problem is gone, bisecting v2.6.27 (which funnily i
> > had to mark good) to v2.6.28 (which has to be marked bad) wasn't fun
> > but eventually converged at ab598b6680f1e74c267d1547ee352f3e1e530f89
> >
> > commit ab598b6680f1e74c267d1547ee352f3e1e530f89
> > Author: Paul Mackerras <paulus@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Date:   Sun Nov 30 11:49:45 2008 +0000
> >
> >      powerpc: Fix system calls on Cell entered with XER.SO=1
> >
> > Now the lock-up is gone, however the code never exercises the path
> > taken during the lock-up so i guess it, at least, deserves a better
> > look by PPC64 care takers.
>
> I'm confused. Which code never exercises which path, and so what
> deserves a better look?

Before this change (atleast) mono_handle_native_sigsegv was executed
(before machine locks-up hard) after the change this code path is
never touched.

The fact that machine locks up hard and not even magic sysrq works
is what deserves a better look.

[..snip..]

--
mailto:av1474@xxxxxxxx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/