Re: linux-next: PowerPC boot failures in next-20120521

2012-05-21 Thread Stephen Rothwell
On Tue, 22 May 2012 13:03:54 +1000 Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > On Mon, 21 May 2012 18:53:37 -0700 (PDT) David Rientjes > wrote: > > > > Yeah, it's sched/numa since that's what introduced numa_init(). It does > > for_each_node() for each node and does a kmalloc_node() even though that > > nod

Re: linux-next: PowerPC boot failures in next-20120521

2012-05-21 Thread Michael Neuling
David Rientjes wrote: > On Tue, 22 May 2012, Michael Neuling wrote: > > > Sorry, got it... CONFIG_DEBUG_VM enabled below... > > > > pid_max: default: 32768 minimum: 301 > > Dentry cache hash table entries: 262144 (order: 5, 2097152 bytes) > > Inode-cache hash table entries: 131072 (order: 4, 10

Re: linux-next: PowerPC boot failures in next-20120521

2012-05-21 Thread Stephen Rothwell
Hi David, On Mon, 21 May 2012 18:53:37 -0700 (PDT) David Rientjes wrote: > > Yeah, it's sched/numa since that's what introduced numa_init(). It does > for_each_node() for each node and does a kmalloc_node() even though that > node may not be online. Slub ends up passing this node to the page

Re: linux-next: PowerPC boot failures in next-20120521

2012-05-21 Thread David Rientjes
On Tue, 22 May 2012, Michael Neuling wrote: > Sorry, got it... CONFIG_DEBUG_VM enabled below... > > pid_max: default: 32768 minimum: 301 > Dentry cache hash table entries: 262144 (order: 5, 2097152 bytes) > Inode-cache hash table entries: 131072 (order: 4, 1048576 bytes) > Mount-cache hash table

Re: linux-next: PowerPC boot failures in next-20120521

2012-05-21 Thread Michael Neuling
David Rientjes wrote: > On Tue, 22 May 2012, Michael Neuling wrote: > > > > > > Trying David's patch just posted doesn't fix it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hmm, what does CONFIG_DEBUG_VM say? > > > > > > No set. > > > > Sorry, should have read "Not set" > > > > I mean if it's set, what does

Re: linux-next: PowerPC boot failures in next-20120521

2012-05-21 Thread David Rientjes
On Tue, 22 May 2012, Michael Neuling wrote: > > > > Trying David's patch just posted doesn't fix it. > > > > > > > > > > Hmm, what does CONFIG_DEBUG_VM say? > > > > No set. > > Sorry, should have read "Not set" > I mean if it's set, what does it emit to the kernel log with my patch applied?

Re: linux-next: PowerPC boot failures in next-20120521

2012-05-21 Thread Michael Neuling
Michael Neuling wrote: > > > Trying David's patch just posted doesn't fix it. > > > > > > > Hmm, what does CONFIG_DEBUG_VM say? > > No set. Sorry, should have read "Not set" mikey ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://

Re: linux-next: PowerPC boot failures in next-20120521

2012-05-21 Thread Michael Neuling
> > Trying David's patch just posted doesn't fix it. > > > > Hmm, what does CONFIG_DEBUG_VM say? No set. Mikey ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev

Re: linux-next: PowerPC boot failures in next-20120521

2012-05-21 Thread David Rientjes
On Tue, 22 May 2012, Michael Neuling wrote: > console [tty0] enabled > console [hvc0] enabled > pid_max: default: 32768 minimum: 301 > Dentry cache hash table entries: 262144 (order: 5, 2097152 bytes) > Inode-cache hash table entries: 131072 (order: 4, 1048576 bytes) > Mount-cache hash table entri

Re: linux-next: PowerPC boot failures in next-20120521

2012-05-21 Thread Michael Neuling
> Hi all, > > Last nights boot tests on various PowerPC systems failed like this: > > calling .numa_group_init+0x0/0x3c @ 1 > initcall .numa_group_init+0x0/0x3c returned 0 after 0 usecs > calling .numa_init+0x0/0x1dc @ 1 > Unable to handle kernel paging request for data at address 0x1688 >

Re: linux-next: PowerPC boot failures in next-20120521

2012-05-21 Thread David Rientjes
On Tue, 22 May 2012, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Unable to handle kernel paging request for data at address 0x1688 > Faulting instruction address: 0xc016e154 > Oops: Kernel access of bad area, sig: 11 [#1] > SMP NR_CPUS=32 NUMA pSeries > Modules linked in: > NIP: c016e154 LR: c00