Ive also had a problem with signal 11, heres a great page explaining the aspects of
signal 11 error from gcc (http://www.bitwizard.nl/sig11/).
Signal 11 is usually a hardware problem, as the article points out. I found a sloppy
soulution playing with my BIOS settings, turns out there was an
Riley Williams wrote:
> Hi Peter.
>
> >> Wasn't 2.2.12 the kernel that included the `lock halt` bug patch?
>
> > Perhaps, but is has absolutely nothing to do with the rest of
> > this discussion.
>
> The `lock halt` bug patch was specific to the Cyrix processors (not to
> be confused with t
Riley Williams wrote:
>
> Wasn't 2.2.12 the kernel that included the `lock halt` bug patch?
>
Perhaps, but is has absolutely nothing to do with the rest of this
discussion.
-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [
Followup to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
By author:szonyi calin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> Almost always ?
> It seems like gcc is THE ONLY program which gets
> signal 11
> Why the X server doesn't get signal 11 ?
> Why others pro
> Almost always ?
> It seems like gcc is THE ONLY program which gets
> signal 11
> Why the X server doesn't get signal 11 ?
> Why others programs don't get signal 11 ?
...
> Some time ago I installed Linux (Redhat 6.0) on my
> pc (Cx486 8M RAM) and gcc had a lot
t; > > a application. It only parse and gernerates
> > object files. How can RAM or
> > > motherboard makes different
> >
> > It's most likely flackey memory.
> >
> > Remember- a single bit that dropps can cause the
> > signal 11. It doesn't
At 10:20 AM 6/29/01, you wrote:
>Almost always ?
>It seems like gcc is THE ONLY program which gets
>signal 11
>Why the X server doesn't get signal 11 ?
>Why others programs don't get signal 11 ?
>
>I remember that once Bill Gates was asked about
>crashes in wi
> It's most likely flackey memory.
>
> Remember- a single bit that dropps can cause the
> signal 11. It doesn't have
> to happen consistently either. I had the same
> problem until I slowed down
> memory access (that seemd to cover the borderline
> chip).
>
>
ed with gcc without any problem. Again compilation is only
> a application. It only parse and gernerates object files. How can RAM or
> motherboard makes different
It's most likely flackey memory.
Remember- a single bit that dropps can cause the signal 11. It doesn't have
to hap
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 11:23:37PM -0600, Blesson Paul wrote:
>
> "This is almost always the result of flakiness in your hardware - either
> RAM (most likely), or motherboard (less likely). "
>
> I cannot understand this. There are many oth
"This is almost always the result of flakiness in your hardware - either
RAM (most likely), or motherboard (less likely). "
I cannot understand this. There are many other
stuffs that I compiled with gcc without any problem. Again compilatio
hi
I am trying to compile the kernel2.4.5 source code.
Presently I have kernel2.2.14 and Redhat6.2. I have egcs1.2.2. Now when I
compile I will get the following error
gcc: Internel compiler error: program cc1 got fatal signal 11
make Error 1
Leaving directory
Hi all,
Well, I upgraded my system to glibc 2.2.1 with few problems. Unfortunately,
there are no improvements in my stability problems. X still dies.
So, I ask again, how can I debug this? How can I determine if this is a
kernel problem or not?
Thanks,
--Rainer
-
To unsubscr
As per Russell King's suggestion, I ran memtest86 on my system for about 12
hours last night. I found no memory errors. Note that the tests did not
complete because I had to stop them this morning. I'll contiue them tonight.
They got through test 9 of 11.
As per David Ford's suggestion, I am loo
Thanks for all the info, comments below:
First, I ran X in gdb and got the following via 'bt' after X died. This is
my first experience with gdb so if I should do anything in particular,
please tell me.
#0 0x401addeb in __sigsuspend (set=0xb930)
at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/sigsuspend.
On Sat, Jan 20, 2001 at 01:46:50PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I know that signal 11 with gcc is a sign of bad hardware; however it
> strikes me that I don't get random oopses - a whole bunch of them is appended.
The compiler tends to hammer harder on the memory than the kern
Rainer Mager wrote:
> > Would this be an SMP IA32 box with glibc 2.2? I have two such boxen
> > showing exactly the same behaviour, although I can't reproduce it at will.
>
> Close, it is actually an SMP IA32 box with glibc 2.1.3. But you've now
> convinced me to not upgrade glibc yet ;-)
Upgra
On Mon, 22 Jan 2001, Russell King wrote:
> Evidence: I recently had a bad 128MB SDRAM which *always* failed at byte
> address 0x220068,
and X is likely to be the biggest process by far on a box, so
statistically will be the process that hits this bad byte the most.
no?
regards,
--
Paul Jakma
Rogier Wolff writes:
> Harware problems are normally not reproducable. Can you attach a
> debugger to your X server, and catch it when things go bad? (And
> give the Xfree86 people a backtrace)
Bad RAM can be extremely reproducable though, and can certainly produce
SEGVs.
Evidence: I recently ha
Rainer Mager wrote:
> particular problem still exists. In brief, X windows dies with signal 11. I
[snip]
Does it always happen when you are moving the mouse over a button or
windowbar or some other on-screen object like that?
Usually, when I have that happen, it's because I'm ove
> Would this be an SMP IA32 box with glibc 2.2? I have two such boxen
> showing exactly the same behaviour, although I can't reproduce it at will.
Close, it is actually an SMP IA32 box with glibc 2.1.3. But you've now
convinced me to not upgrade glibc yet ;-)
--Rainer
-
To unsubscribe from thi
Rainer Mager wrote:
> that it is likely a hardware or kernel problem. So, my question is,
> how can I pin point the problem? Is this likely to be a kernel
> issue?
No, not hardware. No not kernel.
Harware problems are normally not reproducable. Can you attach a
debugger to your X server, and c
On Mon, 22 Jan 2001, Rainer Mager wrote:
> I brought up this issue last month and had some response but as
> of yet my particular problem still exists. In brief, X windows dies
> with signal 11. I have done quite a bit of testing and this does not
> seem to be a hardware is
Hi all,
I brought up this issue last month and had some response but as of yet my
particular problem still exists. In brief, X windows dies with signal 11. I
have done quite a bit of testing and this does not seem to be a hardware
issue. Also, I have never managed to get a signal 11
I know that signal 11 with gcc is a sign of bad hardware; however it
strikes me that I don't get random oopses - a whole bunch of them is appended.
I used 2.4.0 with alsa, kmp3player running and an endless loop compiling the
kernel.
Mirko Kloppstech
ksymoops 2.3.7 on i686 2.4.0. Op
I was wondering if anyone had any new info/suggestions for the Signal 11
problem.
I think I last reported that I had tried 2.4.0test12 w AGPGart and DRM
turned off. This seemed a bit more stable but I did have X crash with
Signall 11 after about 1.5 days.
I'd really appreciate any advice o
On Thu, 14 Dec 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Yes.
>
> And I realize that somebody inside RedHat really wanted to use a snapshot
> in order to get some C++ code to compile right.
>
> But it at the same time threw C stability out the window, by using a
> not-very-widely-tested snapshot for a maj
Date:Fri, 15 Dec 2000 01:09:29 + (GMT)
From: Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > oWe tell vendors to build RPMv3 , glibc 2.1.x
> Curious HOW do you tell vendors??
When they ask. More usefully Dan Quinlann and most vendors put together a
recommended set of thing
> > o We tell vendors to build RPMv3 , glibc 2.1.x
> Curious HOW do you tell vendors??
When they ask. More usefully Dan Quinlann and most vendors put together a
recommended set of things to build with and use. It warns about library
pitfalls, kernel changes and what packaging is supported. It i
Sticking my nose where it doesn't belong...
On Thu, 14 Dec 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Yes, but 2.96 is also binary incompatible with all non-redhat distro's.
> > And since redhat is _the_ distro that commercial entities use to
> > release software for, this was very arguably a bad move.
> o W
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Yes, but 2.96 is also binary incompatible with all non-redhat distro's.
>> And since redhat is _the_ distro that commercial entities use to
>> release software for, this was very arguably a bad move.
>
>Except you conveniently
> Yes, but 2.96 is also binary incompatible with all non-redhat distro's.
> And since redhat is _the_ distro that commercial entities use to
> release software for, this was very arguably a bad move.
Except you conveniently ignore a few facts
o Someone else moved to 2.95 not RH . In fact s
ECTED] wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
>
> > It's related to some change in 2.4 vs. 2.2. There are other programs
> > affected other than X, SSH also get's spurious signal 11's now and again
> > with 2.4 and glibc <= 2.1 and it does not o
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Bernhard Rosenkraenzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The same thing is true of *any* gcc release.
>For example, C++-ABI wise, 2.95.x is incompatible BOTH with egcs 1.1.x
>_and_ the upcoming 3.0 release.
Yes, but 2.96 is also binary incompatible with all non-redhat d
On Thu, 14 Dec 2000, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 11:11:28AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > user applications and (b) gcc-2.96 is so broken that it requires special
> > libraries for C++ vtable chunks handling that is different, so the
> > _working_ gcc can only be used with
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 11:11:28AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> user applications and (b) gcc-2.96 is so broken that it requires special
> libraries for C++ vtable chunks handling that is different, so the
> _working_ gcc can only be used with programs that do not need such
> library support.
E
> If you ask any gcc folks, the main reason they think this was a really
> stupid thing to do was exactly that the 2.96 thing is incompatible BOTH
> with the 2.95.x release _and_ the upcoming 3.0 release.
And with egcs 1.1.2. So
egcs is a different format to all others
2.95 is a
On Thu, 14 Dec 2000, Bernhard Rosenkraenzer wrote:
> >
> > gcc-2.95.2 is at least a real release, from a branch that is actively
> > maintained
>
> Not very actively.
> Please take the time to compare the activity in gcc_2_95_branch with the
> patches in the current "2.96" version in rawhide.
On Thu, 14 Dec 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> If you ask any gcc folks, the main reason they think this was a really
> stupid thing to do was exactly that the 2.96 thing is incompatible BOTH
> with the 2.95.x release _and_ the upcoming 3.0 release.
The same thing is true of *any* gcc release.
For
On Thu, 14 Dec 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > user applications and (b) gcc-2.96 is so broken that it requires special
> > libraries for C++ vtable chunks handling that is different, so the
>
> Wrong - the C++ vtable format change is part of the intended progression of the
> compiler and needed t
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 04:42:03AM -0800, Clayton Weaver wrote:
> There has a been a thread on the teTeX mailing list the last few days
> about a (RedHat, but probably more general than just their rpms)
> gcc-2.9.6 w/glibc-2.2.x bug. At -O2, it can miscompile
>
> unsigned varname; /* "unsigned i
> I don't know why RH decided to do their idiotic gcc-2.96 release (it
> certainly wasn't approved by any technical gcc people - the gcc people
Every single patch in that release barring I believe 2 was accepted into
the main tree. So they liked the code. The naming did upset people and was
unfor
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Clayton Weaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>There has a been a thread on the teTeX mailing list the last few days
>about a (RedHat, but probably more general than just their rpms)
>gcc-2.9.6 w/glibc-2.2.x bug. At -O2, it can miscompile
Quite frankly, anybody who
This is unrelated to the signal 11 problem, but something to consider
for "random crashes and segfaults", ie are you using this compiler
and glibc version combination.
There has a been a thread on the teTeX mailing list the last few days
about a (RedHat, but probably more general than
On Wed, 13 Dec 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Dec 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > Hint: "ptep_mkdirty()".
rather obvious oopsie.. once spotted.
> In case you wonder why the bug was so insidious, what this caused was two
> separate problems, both of them able to cause SIGSGV's.
On Wed, 13 Dec 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Dec 2000, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> >
> > Not in my test tree. Same fault, and same trace leading up to it. no
>
> Ok.
>
> It definitely looks like a swapoff() problem.
>
> Have you ever seen the behaviour without running swapoff?
No.
>
ver have a signal 11
again and will never, ever crash ;-)
Finally, as soon as there is a patch, can other people who have seen this
problem test it. My problem is so random that I'd need at least a few days
to gain some confidence this is fixed.
Thanks all.
--Rainer
> -Original Message--
On Wed, 13 Dec 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> Ehh, I think I found it.
>
> Hint: "ptep_mkdirty()".
>
> Oops.
>
> I'll bet you $5 USD (and these days, that's about a gadzillion Euros) that
Poor European Gérard as slim as 1.84 meter - 78 Kg these days.
What about old days poor European L
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 11:35:57AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> Ehh, I think I found it.
>
> Hint: "ptep_mkdirty()".
>
> Oops.
>
> I'll bet you $5 USD (and these days, that's about a gadzillion Euros) that
> this explains it.
>
> Linus
Good. Sounds like you guys have a
On Wed, 13 Dec 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> Hint: "ptep_mkdirty()".
In case you wonder why the bug was so insidious, what this caused was two
separate problems, both of them able to cause SIGSGV's.
One: we didn't mark the page table entry dirty like we were supposed to.
Two: by making it
Ehh, I think I found it.
Hint: "ptep_mkdirty()".
Oops.
I'll bet you $5 USD (and these days, that's about a gadzillion Euros) that
this explains it.
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
P
On Wed, 13 Dec 2000, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
> Not in my test tree. Same fault, and same trace leading up to it. no
Ok.
It definitely looks like a swapoff() problem.
Have you ever seen the behaviour without running swapoff?
Also, can you re-create it without running swapon() (if it's somet
On Wed, 13 Dec 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Dec 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > Lookin gat "swapoff()", it could easily be something like
> >
> > - swapoff walks theough the processes, marking the pages dirty
> >(correctly)
> > - swapoff goes on to the next swap entry, and
On Wed, 13 Dec 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> Lookin gat "swapoff()", it could easily be something like
>
> - swapoff walks theough the processes, marking the pages dirty
>(correctly)
> - swapoff goes on to the next swap entry, and because it needs memory for
>this, the VM layer wil
wing app. If I run my
> >> script from an xterm (or gnome-terminal or whatever) then it starts up fine.
> >> If, however, I try to launch it from my gnome taskbar's menu then it dies
> >> with signal 11 (the Java log is available upon request). This seems to be
> &
On Wed, 13 Dec 2000, Rainer Mager wrote:
> Mike et al,
>
> I have no idea what IKD is and I don't know what to do with any results I
> might find BUT I'd be happy to do this if it will help. Please pass on the
> info with the instructions. Who should I report the results to?
IKD is a debu
>> From: CMA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> Did you already try to selectively disable L1 and L2 caches (if
>> your box has both) and see what happens?
>
>Anyone know how to do this?
If you own a p6 class machine (sorry but I didn't find your hw specs in
previous messages)
you should be able to en
Mike et al,
I have no idea what IKD is and I don't know what to do with any results I
might find BUT I'd be happy to do this if it will help. Please pass on the
info with the instructions. Who should I report the results to?
--Rainer
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Mike Galbr
Give that man a cigarit was an env var (not LOCALE but LANG). I'd
actually checked this but I didn't think that made a difference in my case.
Thanks Linus, now can you fix the larger signal 11 problem?
--Rainer
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Linus Torvalds
> I&
On Wed, 13 Dec 2000, Rainer Mager wrote:
> Thanks for the info...
>
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jeff V. Merkey
> > > So, is this related to the larger signal 11 problems?
> >
> > There's a corruption bug in the page cache somewhere, and i
ver) then it starts up fine.
>> If, however, I try to launch it from my gnome taskbar's menu then it dies
>> with signal 11 (the Java log is available upon request). This seems to be
>> 100% consistent, since I noticed it yesterday, even across reboots.
>> Interestingly, t
Thanks for the info...
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jeff V. Merkey
> > So, is this related to the larger signal 11 problems?
>
> There's a corruption bug in the page cache somewhere, and it's 100%
> reproducable. Finding it will be tough
Ok, gr
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 09:22:55AM +0900, Rainer Mager wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> Ok, I just upgraded to 2.4.0test12 (although I don't think there was any
> work in 12 that directly addresses this signal 11 problem). When compiling
> the new kernel I chose to disabl
Hi again,
Ok, I just upgraded to 2.4.0test12 (although I don't think there was any
work in 12 that directly addresses this signal 11 problem). When compiling
the new kernel I chose to disable AGPGart and RDM as suggested by
[EMAIL PROTECTED] I will report later if this make
repeat that my signal 11 problem has (so far)
only caused X to die. The OS remains up and stable.
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> My troublesome box finally seems to be stable.[...]I disabled DRM
> & AGPGart. With them both disabled, I get no problems at all.
&g
On Mon, 11 Dec 2000, Rainer Mager wrote:
> Well, I just had a Signal 11 even with the patch. What can I do to help
> figure this out?
My troublesome box finally seems to be stable. It's been up for the
last two days whilst under quite heavy loads without problems.
Previously, it wou
On Mon, 11 Dec 2000, Rainer Mager wrote:
> Well, I just had a Signal 11 even with the patch. What can I do to help
> figure this out?
Is init permanently running after you see a couple of these?
-Mike
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ker
Well, I just had a Signal 11 even with the patch. What can I do to help
figure this out?
Thanks,
--Rainer
-Original Message-
From: Alan Cox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 08, 2000 11:07 PM
To: David Woodhouse
Cc: Andi Kleen; Rainer Mager; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mark
: David Woodhouse
Cc: Andi Kleen; Rainer Mager; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mark Vojkovich
Subject: Re: Signal 11
> > wrong with it. I've only seen this under 2.3.x/2.4 SMP kernels. I
> > would say that this is definitely a kernel problem.=20
>
> XFree86 3.9 and XFree86 4 were rock
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Sat, 9 Dec 2000, Matthew Vanecek wrote:
>
> > > Have any of the folks seeing it checked if Ben LaHaise's fixes for the page
> > > table updating race help ?
> > > Alan
> >
> > Where are his fixes at? I don't seem to see any of his posts in the
> > archives.
>
>
On Sat, 9 Dec 2000, Matthew Vanecek wrote:
> > Have any of the folks seeing it checked if Ben LaHaise's fixes for the page
> > table updating race help ?
> > Alan
>
> Where are his fixes at? I don't seem to see any of his posts in the
> archives.
dwmw2 posted one such patch earlier this week :
Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > > wrong with it. I've only seen this under 2.3.x/2.4 SMP kernels. I
> > > would say that this is definitely a kernel problem.=20
> >
> > XFree86 3.9 and XFree86 4 were rock solid for a _long_ time on 2.[34]
> > kernels - even on my BP6=B9. The random crashes started to hap
David Woodhouse ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote...
> Can you reproduce it with bcrl's patch below:
Did nothing for me. gcc still got a sig11 after a while.
Took three runs of 'make bzImage' before it completed.
I wondered if I'd been unlucky enough to have been sent a
replacement K6-2 which was als
I'll try.
Jeff
On Fri, Dec 08, 2000 at 10:24:55PM +, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Dec 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
>
> > I have not seen it on UP systems either. I only see it on SMP systems.
> > After trying very hard last night, I was able to get my 4 x PPro system to
> > do it w
David Woodhouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
[...]
> I quote from the X devel list, which perhaps I shouldn't do but this is
> hardly NDA'd stuff:
> On Mon 20 Nov 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> > I have seen random crashes on dual P3 BX boards (Tyan) and dual Xeon
> > GX boards (Intel). XFree8
On Fri, Dec 08, 2000 at 11:34:51AM -0800, Mark Vojkovich wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 8 Dec 2000, David Woodhouse wrote:
>
>Some additional data points. It goes away on UP 2.4 kernels.
> Also, I can't recall seeing this problem on IA64. Maybe it's still
> there on IA64 and I just haven't been try
On Fri, 8 Dec 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
> I have not seen it on UP systems either. I only see it on SMP systems.
> After trying very hard last night, I was able to get my 4 x PPro system to
> do it with 2.4.0-12. It seems related to loading in some way. If you
> have more than two processors
On Fri, 8 Dec 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
>
> > I think there may be a case when a process forks, that the MMU or some
> > other subsystem is either not setting the page bits correctly, or
> > mapping in a bad page. It's a LEVEL I bug in 2.4 is this
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Peter Samuelson wrote:
>
> [Dick Johnson]
> > Do:
> >
> > char main[]={0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff};
>
> Oh come on, at least pick an *interesting* invalid opcode:
>
> char main[]={0xf0,0x0f,0xc0,0xc8}; /* try also on NT (: */
What's funny, is that this actually executes on SP
On Fri, 8 Dec 2000, David Woodhouse wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> > Sounds like a X Server bug. You should probably contact XFree86, not
> > linux-kernel
>
> I quote from the X devel list, which perhaps I shouldn't do but this is hardly
> NDA'd stuff:
>
> On Mon 20 Nov 2000, [EMAIL PROT
> > > Andi,
> > >
> > > It's related to some change in 2.4 vs. 2.2. There are other programs
> > > affected other than X, SSH also get's spurious signal 11's now and again
> > > with 2.4 and glibc <= 2.1 and it does not occur on 2.2.
>
[Dick Johnson]
> > > char main[]={0xf0,0x0f,0xc0,0xc8};/* try also on NT (: */
> > me2v@reliant DRFDecoder $ ./op
> > Illegal instruction (core dumped)
>
> Yep. And on early Pentinums, the ones with the "f00f" bug, it would
> lock the machine tighter than a witches crotch. Ooops, not
> pol
On Fri, 8 Dec 2000, Matthew Vanecek wrote:
> Peter Samuelson wrote:
> >
> > [Dick Johnson]
> > > Do:
> > >
> > > char main[]={0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff};
> >
> > Oh come on, at least pick an *interesting* invalid opcode:
> >
> > char main[]={0xf0,0x0f,0xc0,0xc8};/* try also on NT (: */
> >
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
>
> > I think there may be a case when a process forks, that the MMU or some
> > other subsystem is either not setting the page bits correctly, or
> > mapping in a bad page. It's a LEVEL I bug in 2.4 is this is the case,
> >
Peter Samuelson wrote:
>
> [Dick Johnson]
> > Do:
> >
> > char main[]={0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff};
>
> Oh come on, at least pick an *interesting* invalid opcode:
>
> char main[]={0xf0,0x0f,0xc0,0xc8};/* try also on NT (: */
>
me2v@reliant DRFDecoder $ ./op
Illegal instruction (core dumped)
I
> > wrong with it. I've only seen this under 2.3.x/2.4 SMP kernels. I
> > would say that this is definitely a kernel problem.=20
>
> XFree86 3.9 and XFree86 4 were rock solid for a _long_ time on 2.[34]
> kernels - even on my BP6=B9. The random crashes started to happen when =
> I
> upgraded my
> Various processes have been getting random signals after heavy CPU usage.
> Playing an MPEG movie, kernel compile, or even just some small apps
> compiling sometimes. Just for the record, this isn't an OOM situation,
> I've watched this box with half its memory free or in buffers left
> unattend
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Sounds like a X Server bug. You should probably contact XFree86, not
> linux-kernel
I quote from the X devel list, which perhaps I shouldn't do but this is hardly
NDA'd stuff:
On Mon 20 Nov 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> I have seen random crashes on dual P3 BX bo
"Jeff V. Merkey" wrote:
>
> > So have you enabled core dumps and actually looked at the core dumps
> > of the programs using gdb to see where they crashed ?
>
> Yes. I can only get the SSH crash when I am running remotely from the
> house over the internet, and it only shows then when running
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
> I think there may be a case when a process forks, that the MMU or some
> other subsystem is either not setting the page bits correctly, or
> mapping in a bad page. It's a LEVEL I bug in 2.4 is this is the case,
> BTW. In core dumps (I've looked at 2 o
ke some type
of mapping bug.
Jeff
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
>
> > It's related to some change in 2.4 vs. 2.2. There are other programs
> > affected other than X, SSH also get's spurious signal 11's now and again
>
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
> It's related to some change in 2.4 vs. 2.2. There are other programs
> affected other than X, SSH also get's spurious signal 11's now and again
> with 2.4 and glibc <= 2.1 and it does not occur on 2.2.
I've begun to
Hi all,
Thanks for all the input so far. Regarding this...
> (I'm not sure exactly what cerberos does, do you have a link for it ?).
The official name is "Cerberus Test Control System" aka CTCS. I don't know
the official site but a search for this should reveal something. Anyway it
is a
[Dick Johnson]
> Do:
>
> char main[]={0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff};
Oh come on, at least pick an *interesting* invalid opcode:
char main[]={0xf0,0x0f,0xc0,0xc8};/* try also on NT (: */
Peter
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [E
On Fri, 8 Dec 2000, Rainer Mager wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've searched around for a answer to this with no real luck yet. If anyone
> has some ideas I'd be very grateful.
Signal 11 just means that you "seg-faulted". This is usually caused
by a coding error.
Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 06:24:34PM -0700, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
> >
> > Andi,
> >
> > It's related to some change in 2.4 vs. 2.2. There are other programs
> > affected other than X, SSH also get's spurious signal 11's
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 06:24:34PM -0700, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
>
> Andi,
>
> It's related to some change in 2.4 vs. 2.2. There are other programs
> affected other than X, SSH also get's spurious signal 11's now and again
> with 2.4 and glibc <= 2.1 and it
Andi,
It's related to some change in 2.4 vs. 2.2. There are other programs
affected other than X, SSH also get's spurious signal 11's now and again
with 2.4 and glibc <= 2.1 and it does not occur on 2.2.
Jeff
Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 08, 2000 at 09:44:29AM +
only info
> I get back is that it was because of signal 11.
> I've heard that signal 11 can be related to bad hardware, most often
> memory, but I've done a good bit of testing on this and the system seems ok.
> What I did was to run the VA Linux Cerberos(sp?) test
On Fri, Dec 08, 2000 at 09:44:29AM +0900, Rainer Mager wrote:
> I've heard that signal 11 can be related to bad hardware, most
> often memory, but I've done a good bit of testing on this and the
> system seems ok. What I did was to run the VA Linux Cerberos(sp?)
> t
1 - 100 of 103 matches
Mail list logo
