On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 11:53 PM, dann frazier<da...@dannf.org> wrote: > We have been running with UP kernels for quite some time, and they > haven't proven to be any more stable. Most recently I've upgraded > peri/penalosa to 2.6.31-rc6-based kernels since they were inclusive of > the various changes I was pointed to on this list (thanks John/Helge).
Where exactly did you get this kernel, do you have a URL reference? > peri has been surprisingly stable - uptime of 2 weeks so far, and it > seems to be under pretty steady build load. That sounds great. > penalosa is a different story - it has been very unstable with uptimes > of several hours at most. The hardware/kernel packages are identical > to that of peri (afaict), so I'm not sure why. The failure mode > results in infinite panics being printed to the console - but every > time I've seen it I haven't had enough console history to see the > beginning of this crash. I am now logging the console to see if I can > capture that. It is of course possible that penalosa is having > hardware problems - but I don't know of a way to prove this > conclusively. We could maybe swap disks to see if the failure follows > the disks or the hardware (though that doesn't eliminate a disk > problem). The way to prove this is to put an instrumented kernel on penalosa. I think the way forward is: * You get me a console trace. * I give you an instrumented kernel/initrd. * Repeat. Are you allowed to boot a kernel/initrd that I send you? > Note that I don't monitor the build output, so I don't know if we're > still seeing the same level of random segfaults in userland. > LaMont? Cheers, Carlos. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
