This bug was fixed in the package linux - 2.6.35-24.42
---
linux (2.6.35-24.42) maverick-proposed; urgency=low
[ Brad Figg ]
- LP: #683422
[ Colin Ian King ]
* SAUCE: Allow registration of handler to multiple WMI events with same
GUID
- LP: #676997
* SAUCE: Add WM
Also confirmed that I can boot the kernel from #30 in an m2.4xlarge
instance. It still sees only 32 GB of memory, though (bug 667796).
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/651370
Title:
ec2
I can confirm to be able to boot the latest kernel in a m2.4xlarge
instance which was usually crashing because it landed on hardware that
triggered the intel_idle driver to load.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://
I've verified this:
* start instance of (t1.micro)
# us-east-1 ami-548c783d ebs/ubuntu-maverick-10.10-amd64-server-20101007.1
* ssh instance, install kernel reboot
% wget
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+archive/primary/+files/linux-image-2.6.35-24-virtual_2.6.35-24.42_amd64.deb
% sudo dp
Accepted linux into maverick-proposed, the package will build now and be
available in a few hours. Please test and give feedback here. See
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/EnableProposed for documentation how to
enable and use -proposed. Thank you in advance!
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu Maverick)
will a fix for this be backported to Maverick?
--
ec2 kernel crash invalid opcode [#1]
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/651370
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
This bug was fixed in the package linux - 2.6.37-3.11
---
linux (2.6.37-3.11) natty; urgency=low
[ Andy Whitcroft ]
* Revert "ubuntu: AUFS -- update to
b37c575759dc4535ccc03241c584ad5fe69e3b25"
* Revert "ubuntu: AUFS -- track changes to the arguements to fop fsync()"
* Re
@Brandon, sorry for the late response. Have been traveling. And yes,
Scott's reply is right. The comment about 68G was made because selecting
this size seems to trigger the crash more reliably. But it has nothing
to do with the memory size itself. Just that requesting that size seems
to get you a r
@Brandon,
Stefan's comment in the SRU justification about 68G of memory (which should
have been 64) is really only suggesting that selection of a larger instance
size seems more likely to land you on newer hardware where failure is more
likely.
--
ec2 kernel crash invalid opcode [#1]
ht
Stefan: the ~32 vs ~64GB memory issue is very likely orthogonal and has
a separate bug now (bug 667796). This issue is solely about intel_idle
vs certain CPU types under Amazon's EC2 (Xen) environment. m2.4xlarge
in us-east reproduces the crash on boot readily (and also happens to
exhibit the mem
** Description changed:
+ SRU Justification:
+
+ Impact: Booting an Intel based instance with certain CPU level will fail
+ with a panic as the driver does not seem to take into account that it is
+ running in a virtualized environment. This only is a problem with the
+ intel_idle driver.
+
+ Fi
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu Maverick)
Status: New => In Progress
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed => In Progress
--
ec2 kernel crash invalid opcode [#1]
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/651370
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
** Also affects: linux (Ubuntu Maverick)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
ec2 kernel crash invalid opcode [#1]
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/651370
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mail
I'm attaching a console output of a lucid 10.04 from:
us-east-1 ami-4a0df923 canonical ebs/ubuntu-lucid-10.04-amd64-server-20101020
This shows very interesting time travel (both forward and backward) on an
otherwise functional instance.
Thus, while the kernel time messages are not pretty looking,
Mike,
Thanks for your test. Its interesting that we still see the time travel of
roughly 100 days in your dmesg.
I gather the system was otherwise usable ? Other than only showing 32G of
memory.
--
ec2 kernel crash invalid opcode [#1]
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/651370
You receive
John Johansen's suggested -23.36 kernel booted, but still exhibited bug
667796.
Linux ip-10-230-9-131 2.6.35-23-virtual #36~ec2 SMP Thu Oct 28 15:07:00
UTC 2010 x86_64 GNU/Linux
[0.00] PERCPU: Embedded 30 pages/cpu @88000e8c7000 s91520 r8192
d23168 u122880
[0.00] pcpu-alloc:
There are maverick test kernels at
kernel.ubuntu.com/~jj/linux-image-2.6.35-23-virtual_2.6.35-23.36~ec2_amd64.deb
kernel.ubuntu.com/~jj/linux-image-2.6.35-23-virtual_2.6.35-23.36~ec2_i386.deb
--
ec2 kernel crash invalid opcode [#1]
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/651370
You received this bu
Mikael,
I opened bug 667696 to address the 32G issue.
Brandon,
I opened bug 667793 to address euca-bundle-vol not copying the filesystem
label.
I copied you each on the respective bugs.
--
ec2 kernel crash invalid opcode [#1]
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/651370
You received this bug
Brandon,
sorry about failing to get the command line changed in the ami i rebundled. I
really thought I tested that it had the proper command line before posting
here. The problem in my steps above was selecting "keep local version". I
should have chosen "use maintainers version".
Regarding
What's the method for making the S3 AMIs by the way? When I tried before, I
tried just doing standard ec2-bundle-vol stuff inside of a fixed Maverick, but
my first attempts failed because of the root device not having LABEL=euc-rootfs
in the newly-launched instances, and the second generation
I wasn't able to boot on ami-d258acbb on m2.4xlarge. It seemed to come up
without the special kernel options:
[0.00] Linux version 2.6.35-22-virtual (bui...@allspice) (gcc version
4.4.5 (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.4.4-14ubuntu4) ) #33-Ubuntu SMP Sun Sep 19 21:05:42 UTC
2010 (Ubuntu 2.6.35-22.33-
Brandon's and Scott's workaround works for me partly, but the kernel on
an instance started in such a way seems to detect only 32 GB of memory
even for a m2.4xlarge instance which should have 68.4 GB available,
according to the EC2 instances page. Is this a side-effect of the
workaround, or a compl
Well, I had a hunch this morning that perhaps my test AMI was faulty (perhaps
some stupid issue related to block-device mapping, etc, which varies between
the variations on c1.xlarge), since it wasn't packaged by the same
methods/tools as the official one.
It seems this may be the case. Going
I just tried to launch 16 * m2.4xlarge instances with ami-e43e0b90 in
the eu-west-1b area, and not a single one would boot up successfully,
because of this bug. Any workaround yet?
--
ec2 kernel crash invalid opcode [#1]
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/651370
You received this bug notificati
So far my test instances with one or both of the MWAIT-related kernel flags
have given even worse results than the original: They boot showing intel_idle
disabled on E5410 nodes only, but the (assumed) E5506 nodes just terminate
themselves quickly with no console log output at all (even after w
I forgot to add above: on the E5410 c1.xlarge's that do boot successfully, the
kernel output contains:
Oct 26 07:37:55 ip-10-243-51-207 kernel: [0.210255] intel_idle: MWAIT
substates: 0x2220
Oct 26 07:37:55 ip-10-243-51-207 kernel: [0.210257] intel_idle: does not
run on family 6 model
I tried to look in more detail at the crash this evening, because it's really
causing me a lot of headache now. The most recent time I tried to boot a new
c1.xlarge in us-east-1 this evening, I had to cycle through the
crash/terminate/relaunch cycle 7 times before I got a working instance. I
On Mon, 25 Oct 2010, Brandon Black wrote:
> Having the same issue on c1.xlarge in us-east-1 (kernel crash on boot
> related to intel_idle). I've booted the Maverick release AMI several
> times on m1.large instances fine, but I seem to have a 50%+ failure rate
> getting it to initially boot withou
Having the same issue on c1.xlarge in us-east-1 (kernel crash on boot
related to intel_idle). I've booted the Maverick release AMI several
times on m1.large instances fine, but I seem to have a 50%+ failure rate
getting it to initially boot without crashing on c1.xlarge. You're
going to need to r
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided => Medium
--
ec2 kernel crash invalid opcode [#1]
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/651370
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs
Moving this to confirmed, I attached 2 other console logs seeing this failure.
In both cases, the clock jumped forward by hundreds of thousands of seconds.
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Status: Incomplete => Confirmed
--
ec2 kernel crash invalid opcode [#1]
https://bugs.launchpad.net
** Attachment added: "console log: us-east-1-x86_64-ami-1a9e6a73 (first boot)"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/651370/+attachment/1677128/+files/console.txt
--
ec2 kernel crash invalid opcode [#1]
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/651370
You received this bug notifica
** Attachment added: "console log: us-east-1-x86_64-ami-1a9e6a73 (restarted)"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/651370/+attachment/1677126/+files/console-restart.txt
--
ec2 kernel crash invalid opcode [#1]
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/651370
You received this bug n
Hi Scott,
If you could also please test the latest upstream kernel available that would
be great. It will allow additional upstream developers to examine the issue.
Refer to https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelMainlineBuilds . Once you've tested the
upstream kernel, please remove the 'needs-upstre
** Description changed:
I saw a kernel crash in maverick RC testing. I will attach console
output here, the system reported is the same AMI, but the issue occurred
on c1.xlarge instance type.
The crash begins like this:
- [2725458.312511] invalid opcode: [#1] SMP ^M
- [2725458.312
** Tags added: iso-testing
--
ec2 kernel crash invalid opcode [#1]
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/651370
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu
** Attachment added: "console log of failed instance"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/651370/+attachment/1654361/+files/console-restart.txt
** Attachment added: "BootDmesg.txt"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/651370/+attachment/1654362/+files/BootDmesg.txt
** Attachment added: "Dependenc
37 matches
Mail list logo
