Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:25

2.6.27-rc8-git7: Reported regressions from 2.6.26

This message contains a list of some regressions from 2.6.26, for which there
are no fixes in the mainline I know of.  If any of them have been fixed already,
please let me know.

If you know of any other unresolved regressions from 2.6.26, please let me know
either and I'll add them to the list.  Also, please let me know if any of the
entries below are invalid.

Each entry from the list will be sent additionally in an automatic reply to
this message with CCs to the people involved in reporting and handling the
issue.

Listed regressions statistics:

  Date          Total  Pending  Unresolved
  ----------------------------------------
  2008-10-04      181       41          33
  2008-09-27      173       35          28
  2008-09-21      169       45          36
  2008-09-15      163       46          32
  2008-09-12      163       51          38
  2008-09-07      150       43          33
  2008-08-30      135       48          36
  2008-08-23      122       48          40
  2008-08-16      103       47          37
  2008-08-10       80       52          31
  2008-08-02       47       31          20

Unresolved regressions
----------------------
(Continue reading)

Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11209] 2.6.27-rc1 process time accounting

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11209
Subject		: 2.6.27-rc1 process time accounting
Submitter	: Lukas Hejtmanek <xhejtman@...>
Date		: 2008-07-31 10:43 (66 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121750102917490&w=4
		  http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/9/30/199
Handled-By	: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...>

Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11215] INFO: possible recursive locking detected ps2_command

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11215
Subject		: INFO: possible recursive locking detected ps2_command
Submitter	: Zdenek Kabelac <zdenek.kabelac@...>
Date		: 2008-07-31 9:41 (66 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121749737011637&w=4
Handled-By	: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...>

Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11220] Screen stays black after resume

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11220
Subject		: Screen stays black after resume
Submitter	: Nico Schottelius <nico@...>
Date		: 2008-07-31 21:05 (66 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121753882422899&w=4

Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11210] libata badness

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11210
Subject		: libata badness
Submitter	: Kumar Gala <galak@...>
Date		: 2008-07-31 18:53 (66 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-ide&m=121753059307310&w=4
Handled-By	: Kumar Gala <galak@...>

Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11224] Only three cores found on quad-core machine.

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11224
Subject		: Only three cores found on quad-core machine.
Submitter	: Dave Jones <davej@...>
Date		: 2008-08-01 18:15 (65 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121761475224719&w=4

Nick Piggin | 7 Oct 17:18

Re: [Bug #11224] Only three cores found on quad-core machine.

On Sunday 05 October 2008 04:32, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> of recent regressions.
>
> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> (either way).
>
>
> Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11224
> Subject		: Only three cores found on quad-core machine.
> Submitter	: Dave Jones <davej <at> redhat.com>
> Date		: 2008-08-01 18:15 (65 days old)
> References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121761475224719&w=4

Dave, is your CPU2 getting stuck in calibrate_delay? Can you still
reproduce the bug? What if you boot the kernel with lpj=<something sane
like 2666785> in order to skip the calibrate_delay code?

If that helps, can you try adding some printks to narrow down where it
is getting stuck?
Dave Jones | 7 Oct 17:32
Favicon

Re: [Bug #11224] Only three cores found on quad-core machine.

On Wed, Oct 08, 2008 at 02:18:18AM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
 > On Sunday 05 October 2008 04:32, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
 > > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
 > > of recent regressions.
 > >
 > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
 > > from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
 > > (either way).
 > >
 > >
 > > Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11224
 > > Subject		: Only three cores found on quad-core machine.
 > > Submitter	: Dave Jones <davej@...>
 > > Date		: 2008-08-01 18:15 (65 days old)
 > > References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121761475224719&w=4
 > 
 > Dave, is your CPU2 getting stuck in calibrate_delay? Can you still
 > reproduce the bug? What if you boot the kernel with lpj=<something sane
 > like 2666785> in order to skip the calibrate_delay code?
 > 
 > If that helps, can you try adding some printks to narrow down where it
 > is getting stuck?

This is going to sound strange, but I've forgotten which box that was.
I'm due to reinstall all my test boxes now that the next Fedora beta
has come out anyway, so I'll hopefully figure out by the end of the week :)

	Dave

--

-- 
(Continue reading)

Nick Piggin | 8 Oct 06:24

Re: [Bug #11224] Only three cores found on quad-core machine.

On Wednesday 08 October 2008 02:32, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 08, 2008 at 02:18:18AM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
>  > On Sunday 05 October 2008 04:32, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>  > > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
>  > > of recent regressions.
>  > >
>  > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
>  > > from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me
>  > > know (either way).
>  > >
>  > >
>  > > Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11224
>  > > Subject		: Only three cores found on quad-core machine.
>  > > Submitter	: Dave Jones <davej@...>
>  > > Date		: 2008-08-01 18:15 (65 days old)
>  > > References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121761475224719&w=4
>  >
>  > Dave, is your CPU2 getting stuck in calibrate_delay? Can you still
>  > reproduce the bug? What if you boot the kernel with lpj=<something sane
>  > like 2666785> in order to skip the calibrate_delay code?
>  >
>  > If that helps, can you try adding some printks to narrow down where it
>  > is getting stuck?
>
> This is going to sound strange, but I've forgotten which box that was.
> I'm due to reinstall all my test boxes now that the next Fedora beta
> has come out anyway, so I'll hopefully figure out by the end of the week :)

That does sound strange ;) But I can't believe that! It would be really
interesting if it was stuck in calibrate_delay, but maybe the backtrace
(Continue reading)

Dave Jones | 8 Oct 16:22
Favicon

Re: [Bug #11224] Only three cores found on quad-core machine.

On Wed, Oct 08, 2008 at 03:24:40PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:

 > >  > If that helps, can you try adding some printks to narrow down where it
 > >  > is getting stuck?
 > >
 > > This is going to sound strange, but I've forgotten which box that was.
 > > I'm due to reinstall all my test boxes now that the next Fedora beta
 > > has come out anyway, so I'll hopefully figure out by the end of the week :)
 > 
 > That does sound strange ;) But I can't believe that! It would be really
 > interesting if it was stuck in calibrate_delay, but maybe the backtrace
 > is just messed up...
 > 
 > If you do manage to reproduce it, I would be quite interested. Otherwise,
 > I think we can say it's not a showstopper for 2.6.27.

agreed.  I clearly have too many other shiny toys.

	Dave

--

-- 
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
Dave Jones | 10 Oct 17:39
Favicon

Re: [Bug #11224] Only three cores found on quad-core machine.

On Wed, Oct 08, 2008 at 03:24:40PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
 > On Wednesday 08 October 2008 02:32, Dave Jones wrote:
 > > On Wed, Oct 08, 2008 at 02:18:18AM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
 > >  > On Sunday 05 October 2008 04:32, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
 > >  > > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
 > >  > > of recent regressions.
 > >  > >
 > >  > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
 > >  > > from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me
 > >  > > know (either way).
 > >  > >
 > >  > >
 > >  > > Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11224
 > >  > > Subject		: Only three cores found on quad-core machine.
 > >  > > Submitter	: Dave Jones <davej@...>
 > >  > > Date		: 2008-08-01 18:15 (65 days old)
 > >  > > References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121761475224719&w=4
 > >  >
 > >  > Dave, is your CPU2 getting stuck in calibrate_delay? Can you still
 > >  > reproduce the bug? What if you boot the kernel with lpj=<something sane
 > >  > like 2666785> in order to skip the calibrate_delay code?
 > >  >
 > >  > If that helps, can you try adding some printks to narrow down where it
 > >  > is getting stuck?
 > >
 > > This is going to sound strange, but I've forgotten which box that was.
 > > I'm due to reinstall all my test boxes now that the next Fedora beta
 > > has come out anyway, so I'll hopefully figure out by the end of the week :)
 > 
 > That does sound strange ;) But I can't believe that! It would be really
(Continue reading)

Rafael J. Wysocki | 10 Oct 21:39

Re: [Bug #11224] Only three cores found on quad-core machine.

On Friday, 10 of October 2008, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 08, 2008 at 03:24:40PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
>  > On Wednesday 08 October 2008 02:32, Dave Jones wrote:
>  > > On Wed, Oct 08, 2008 at 02:18:18AM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
>  > >  > On Sunday 05 October 2008 04:32, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>  > >  > > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
>  > >  > > of recent regressions.
>  > >  > >
>  > >  > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
>  > >  > > from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me
>  > >  > > know (either way).
>  > >  > >
>  > >  > >
>  > >  > > Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11224
>  > >  > > Subject		: Only three cores found on quad-core machine.
>  > >  > > Submitter	: Dave Jones <davej@...>
>  > >  > > Date		: 2008-08-01 18:15 (65 days old)
>  > >  > > References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121761475224719&w=4
>  > >  >
>  > >  > Dave, is your CPU2 getting stuck in calibrate_delay? Can you still
>  > >  > reproduce the bug? What if you boot the kernel with lpj=<something sane
>  > >  > like 2666785> in order to skip the calibrate_delay code?
>  > >  >
>  > >  > If that helps, can you try adding some printks to narrow down where it
>  > >  > is getting stuck?
>  > >
>  > > This is going to sound strange, but I've forgotten which box that was.
>  > > I'm due to reinstall all my test boxes now that the next Fedora beta
>  > > has come out anyway, so I'll hopefully figure out by the end of the week :)
>  > 
(Continue reading)

Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11271] BUG: fealnx in 2.6.27-rc1

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11271
Subject		: BUG: fealnx in 2.6.27-rc1
Submitter	: Jaswinder Singh <jaswinderlinux@...>
Date		: 2008-08-05 14:58 (61 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=121794762016830&w=4
		  http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/8/10/98
Handled-By	: Francois Romieu <romieu@...>

Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11272] BUG: parport_serial in 2.6.27-rc1 for NetMos Technology PCI 9835

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11272
Subject		: BUG: parport_serial in 2.6.27-rc1 for NetMos Technology PCI 9835
Submitter	: Jaswinder Singh <jaswinderlinux@...>
Date		: 2008-08-05 15:12 (61 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121794900319776&w=4

Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11264] Invalid op opcode in kernel/workqueue

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11264
Subject		: Invalid op opcode in kernel/workqueue
Submitter	: Jean-Luc Coulon <jean.luc.coulon@...>
Date		: 2008-08-07 04:18 (59 days old)

Nick Piggin | 7 Oct 17:23

Re: [Bug #11264] Invalid op opcode in kernel/workqueue

On Sunday 05 October 2008 04:32, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> of recent regressions.
>
> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> (either way).
>
>
> Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11264
> Subject		: Invalid op opcode in kernel/workqueue
> Submitter	: Jean-Luc Coulon <jean.luc.coulon <at> gmail.com>
> Date		: 2008-08-07 04:18 (59 days old)

Any progress being made with this one? Dave, Oleg did some pretty
nice looking debugging work that indicates it might be a cpufreq
problem. Have you had a chance to look at the comments in the
bugzilla? Or have you been cc'ed on patches for this?

Thanks,
Nick
Dave Jones | 7 Oct 18:58

Re: [Bug #11264] Invalid op opcode in kernel/workqueue

On Wed, Oct 08, 2008 at 02:23:03AM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
 > On Sunday 05 October 2008 04:32, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
 > > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
 > > of recent regressions.
 > >
 > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
 > > from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
 > > (either way).
 > >
 > >
 > > Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11264
 > > Subject		: Invalid op opcode in kernel/workqueue
 > > Submitter	: Jean-Luc Coulon <jean.luc.coulon <at> gmail.com>
 > > Date		: 2008-08-07 04:18 (59 days old)
 > 
 > Any progress being made with this one? Dave, Oleg did some pretty
 > nice looking debugging work that indicates it might be a cpufreq
 > problem. Have you had a chance to look at the comments in the
 > bugzilla? Or have you been cc'ed on patches for this?

I'm not convinced that the original report wasn't hardware related.
We had taken a machine check exception already, which shows that something
isn't quite right.  MCEs happening under high load are usually a sign
of thermal/power problems of some sort.

Oleg's comments may still hold true, independant of the report.
I've added Venki to the Cc: as he's recently rewritten considerable
amounts of the ondemand governor (though the workqueue mechanics
are pretty much the same).

(Continue reading)

Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11442] btusb hibernation/suspend breakage in current -git

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11442
Subject		: btusb hibernation/suspend breakage in current -git
Submitter	: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...>
Date		: 2008-08-25 11:37 (41 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-bluetooth&m=121966402012074&w=4
Handled-By	: Oliver Neukum <oliver@...>
Patch		: http://marc.info/?l=linux-bluetooth&m=121967226027323&w=4
		  http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11442#c1

Marcel Holtmann | 4 Oct 22:17

Re: [Bug #11442] btusb hibernation/suspend breakage in current -git

Hi Rafael,

> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> of recent regressions.
> 
> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> (either way).
> 
> 
> Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11442
> Subject		: btusb hibernation/suspend breakage in current -git
> Submitter	: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...>
> Date		: 2008-08-25 11:37 (41 days old)
> References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-bluetooth&m=121966402012074&w=4
> Handled-By	: Oliver Neukum <oliver@...>
> Patch		: http://marc.info/?l=linux-bluetooth&m=121967226027323&w=4
> 		  http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11442#c1

the patch is not the actual fix for it. It is just a band aid. As you
confirmed, the double free patch fixes it. See my pull request, but it
didn't make it into Linus' tree yet.

Regards

Marcel

Please pull from

    git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/holtmann/bluetooth-2.6.git master
(Continue reading)

Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 22:31

Re: [Bug #11442] btusb hibernation/suspend breakage in current -git

On Saturday, 4 of October 2008, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
> 
> > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> > of recent regressions.
> > 
> > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> > from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> > (either way).
> > 
> > 
> > Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11442
> > Subject		: btusb hibernation/suspend breakage in current -git
> > Submitter	: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...>
> > Date		: 2008-08-25 11:37 (41 days old)
> > References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-bluetooth&m=121966402012074&w=4
> > Handled-By	: Oliver Neukum <oliver@...>
> > Patch		: http://marc.info/?l=linux-bluetooth&m=121967226027323&w=4
> > 		  http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11442#c1
> 
> the patch is not the actual fix for it. It is just a band aid. As you
> confirmed, the double free patch fixes it. See my pull request, but it
> didn't make it into Linus' tree yet.

I know, I didn't close this entry just because the fix is not yet in the Linus'
tree.

Thanks,
Rafael

(Continue reading)

Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11407] suspend: unable to handle kernel paging request

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11407
Subject		: suspend: unable to handle kernel paging request
Submitter	: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...>
Date		: 2008-08-21 17:28 (45 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121933974928881&w=4
Handled-By	: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...>
		  Pekka Enberg <penberg@...>
		  Pavel Machek <pavel@...>

Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11380] lockdep warning: cpu_add_remove_lock at:cpu_maps_update_begin+0x14/0x16

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11380
Subject		: lockdep warning: cpu_add_remove_lock at:cpu_maps_update_begin+0x14/0x16
Submitter	: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...>
Date		: 2008-08-20 6:44 (46 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121921480931970&w=4

Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11230] Kconfig no longer outputs a .config with freshly updated defconfigs

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11230
Subject		: Kconfig no longer outputs a .config with freshly updated defconfigs
Submitter	: Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...>
Date		: 2008-08-02 16:03 (64 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121769306319391&w=4

Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11404] BUG: in 2.6.23-rc3-git7 in do_cciss_intr

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11404
Subject		: BUG: in 2.6.23-rc3-git7 in do_cciss_intr
Submitter	: rdunlap <randy.dunlap@...>
Date		: 2008-08-21 5:52 (45 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121929819616273&w=4
		  http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121932889105368&w=4
Handled-By	: Miller, Mike (OS Dev) <Mike.Miller@...>
		  James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...>

Randy Dunlap | 12 Oct 23:52
Favicon

Re: [Bug #11404] BUG: in 2.6.23-rc3-git7 in do_cciss_intr

Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> of recent regressions.
> 
> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> (either way).
> 
> 
> Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11404
> Subject		: BUG: in 2.6.23-rc3-git7 in do_cciss_intr
> Submitter	: rdunlap <randy.dunlap@...>
> Date		: 2008-08-21 5:52 (45 days old)
> References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121929819616273&w=4
> 		  http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121932889105368&w=4
> Handled-By	: Miller, Mike (OS Dev) <Mike.Miller@...>
> 		  James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...>

Also happened with 2.6.27-git2.

--

-- 
~Randy
Randy Dunlap | 17 Oct 20:18
Favicon

Re: [Bug #11404] BUG: in 2.6.23-rc3-git7 in do_cciss_intr

Randy Dunlap wrote:
> Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
>> of recent regressions.
>>
>> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
>> from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
>> (either way).
>>
>>
>> Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11404
>> Subject		: BUG: in 2.6.23-rc3-git7 in do_cciss_intr
>> Submitter	: rdunlap <randy.dunlap@...>
>> Date		: 2008-08-21 5:52 (45 days old)
>> References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121929819616273&w=4
>> 		  http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121932889105368&w=4
>> Handled-By	: Miller, Mike (OS Dev) <Mike.Miller@...>
>> 		  James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...>
> 
> Also happened with 2.6.27-git2.

and on 2.6.27-git7.
Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11308] tbench regression on each kernel release from 2.6.22 -&gt; 2.6.28

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11308
Subject		: tbench regression on each kernel release from 2.6.22 -&gt; 2.6.28
Submitter	: Christoph Lameter <cl@...>
Date		: 2008-08-11 18:36 (55 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121847986119495&w=4
		  http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122125737421332&w=4

Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11340] LTP overnight run resulted in unusable box

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11340
Subject		: LTP overnight run resulted in unusable box
Submitter	: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...>
Date		: 2008-08-13 9:24 (53 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121861951902949&w=4

Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11476] failure to associate after resume from suspend to ram

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11476
Subject		: failure to associate after resume from suspend to ram
Submitter	: Michael S. Tsirkin <m.s.tsirkin@...>
Date		: 2008-09-01 13:33 (34 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122028529415108&w=4
Handled-By	: Zhu Yi <yi.zhu@...>
		  Dan Williams <dcbw@...>
		  Jouni Malinen <j <at> w1.fi>

Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11516] severe performance degradation on x86_64 going from 2.6.26-rc9 -&gt; 2.6.27-rc5

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11516
Subject		: severe performance degradation on x86_64 going from 2.6.26-rc9 -&gt; 2.6.27-rc5
Submitter	: Jason Vas Dias <jason.vas.dias@...>
Date		: 2008-09-07 13:59 (28 days old)

Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11569] Don't complain about disabled irqs when the system has paniced

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11569
Subject		: Don't complain about disabled irqs when the system has paniced
Submitter	: Andi Kleen <andi@...>
Date		: 2008-09-02 13:49 (33 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122036356127282&w=4

Andi Kleen | 6 Oct 08:02

Re: [Bug #11569] Don't complain about disabled irqs when the system has paniced

On Sat, Oct 04, 2008 at 07:32:54PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> of recent regressions.
> 
> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> (either way).
> 
> 
> Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11569
> Subject		: Don't complain about disabled irqs when the system has paniced
> Submitter	: Andi Kleen <andi@...>
> Date		: 2008-09-02 13:49 (33 days old)
> References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122036356127282&w=4

The problem is actually worse than this description suggests. I updated
the bugzilla entry now.

The new smp_call_function() that is called from panic is quite unsuitable
for this task:
- It allocates memory (not a good idea in panic0
- It complains about interrupt off
- This whole thing breaks at least machine checks

-Andi

--

-- 
ak@...
Nick Piggin | 7 Oct 17:44

Re: [Bug #11569] Don't complain about disabled irqs when the system has paniced

On Monday 06 October 2008 17:02, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 04, 2008 at 07:32:54PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> > of recent regressions.
> >
> > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> > from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> > (either way).
> >
> >
> > Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11569
> > Subject		: Don't complain about disabled irqs when the system has paniced
> > Submitter	: Andi Kleen <andi <at> firstfloor.org>
> > Date		: 2008-09-02 13:49 (33 days old)
> > References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122036356127282&w=4
>
> The problem is actually worse than this description suggests. I updated
> the bugzilla entry now.
>
> The new smp_call_function() that is called from panic is quite unsuitable
> for this task:
> - It allocates memory (not a good idea in panic0
> - It complains about interrupt off
> - This whole thing breaks at least machine checks

Why doesn't it use something like nmi_shootdown_cpus on panic rather than
the (I guess less reliable and longer latency) smp_send_stop?
Andi Kleen | 7 Oct 17:54

Re: [Bug #11569] Don't complain about disabled irqs when the system has paniced

> Why doesn't it use something like nmi_shootdown_cpus on panic rather than

There are unfortunately a couple of BIOS around that hang randomly when
NMIs are used (e.g. common problem on ThinkPads). That broke the neck
of the NMI watchdog too.

But yes if we had some way to distingush these broken systems from
sane ones NMI would be the way to go in panic.

-Andi
--

-- 
ak@...
Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11568] spontaneous reboot on resume with 2.6.27

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11568
Subject		: spontaneous reboot on resume with 2.6.27
Submitter	: Andy Wettstein <ajw1980@...>
Date		: 2008-09-14 20:00 (21 days old)

Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11550] pnp: Huge number of "io resource overlap" messages

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11550
Subject		: pnp: Huge number of "io resource overlap" messages
Submitter	: Frans Pop <elendil@...>
Date		: 2008-09-09 10:50 (26 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122095745403793&w=4
Handled-By	: Rene Herman <rene.herman@...>
		  Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@...>
Patch		: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122246533505643&w=4

Frans Pop | 8 Oct 00:34

Re: [Bug #11550] pnp: Huge number of "io resource overlap" messages

On Saturday 04 October 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me
> know (either way).
>
>
> Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11550
> Subject	: pnp: Huge number of "io resource overlap" messages
> Submitter	: Frans Pop <elendil@...>
> Date		: 2008-09-09 10:50 (26 days old)
> References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122095745403793&w=4
> Handled-By	: Rene Herman <rene.herman@...>
> 		  Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@...>
> Patch		: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122246533505643&w=4

The structural patch for this from Bjorn got NACKed. AFAIK we're still 
waiting for someone (Bjorn?) to decide whether to go with a simpler patch 
from Rene for .27 and to push that.

For me it was possible to work around the issue by changing a BIOS 
setting, but I expect it will still affect others with similar BIOS 
behavior.
Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11549] 2.6.27-rc5 acpi: EC Storm error message on bootup

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11549
Subject		: 2.6.27-rc5 acpi: EC Storm error message on bootup
Submitter	: <jmerkey@...>
Date		: 2008-09-02 21:27 (33 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122039255517586&w=4
Handled-By	: Alexey Starikovskiy <astarikovskiy@...>
Patch		: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=18047&action=view

Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11512] sort-of regression due to "kconfig: speed up all*config + randconfig"

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11512
Subject		: sort-of regression due to "kconfig: speed up all*config + randconfig"
Submitter	: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...>
Date		: 2008-09-05 22:50 (30 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122065498013858&w=4

Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11505] oltp ~10% regression with 2.6.27-rc5 on stoakley machine

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11505
Subject		: oltp ~10% regression with 2.6.27-rc5 on stoakley machine
Submitter	: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@...>
Date		: 2008-09-04 7:06 (31 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122051202202373&w=4
		  http://marc.info/?t=122089704700005&r=1&w=4
Handled-By	: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...>
		  Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...>
		  Ingo Molnar <mingo@...>
Patch		: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122194673932703&w=4

Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11543] kernel panic: softlockup in tick_periodic() ???

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11543
Subject		: kernel panic: softlockup in tick_periodic() ???
Submitter	: Joshua Hoblitt <j_kernel@...>
Date		: 2008-09-11 16:46 (24 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122117786124326&w=4
Handled-By	: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...>
		  Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...>
		  Ingo Molnar <mingo@...>

Cyrill Gorcunov | 4 Oct 21:44
Gravatar

Re: [Bug #11543] kernel panic: softlockup in tick_periodic() ???

[Rafael J. Wysocki - Sat, Oct 04, 2008 at 07:32:52PM +0200]
| This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
| of recent regressions.
| 
| The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
| from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
| (either way).
| 
| 
| Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11543
| Subject		: kernel panic: softlockup in tick_periodic() ???
| Submitter	: Joshua Hoblitt <j_kernel@...>
| Date		: 2008-09-11 16:46 (24 days old)
| References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122117786124326&w=4
| Handled-By	: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...>
| 		  Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...>
| 		  Ingo Molnar <mingo@...>
| 
| 

Joshua is testing -rc8 now. He said (in bugzilla entry):
>
> -rc8 proved itself stable for a few days on two test nodes and it's being
> rolled out onto 32 nodes production nodes as I type this.  The bug strikes
> somewhat randomly so it'll take time for it to pop up in -rc8 if it's still
> there.  Heavy jobs will be running over the weekend and should trip this
> issues if it's still in there...
>

So we're waiting for his verdict.
(Continue reading)

Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11697] CD tray closes spontaneously after opening it

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11697
Subject		: CD tray closes spontaneously after opening it
Submitter	: Frans Pop <elendil@...>
Date		: 2008-09-30 10:47 (5 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122277167125264&w=4
Handled-By	: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...>

Frans Pop | 8 Oct 00:21

Re: [Bug #11697] CD tray closes spontaneously after opening it

On Saturday 04 October 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me
> know (either way).
>
> Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11697
> Subject	: CD tray closes spontaneously after opening it
> Submitter	: Frans Pop <elendil@...>
> Date		: 2008-09-30 10:47 (5 days old)
> References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122277167125264&w=4
> Handled-By	: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...>

I have not been able to reproduce this recently. I also don't think it's 
really worth tracking this as a regression as there's still a lot of 
uncertainty as to what the cause is.

Cheers,
FJP
Rafael J. Wysocki | 4 Oct 19:32

[Bug #11700] ACPI instabilities and IRQs being disabled

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11700
Subject		: ACPI instabilities and IRQs being disabled
Submitter	: Shawn Starr <<