From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 15 08:22:45 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6497A16A4D0 for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2004 08:22:45 +0000 (GMT) Received: from lon-mail-3.gradwell.net (lon-mail-3.gradwell.net [193.111.201.127]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A269B43D2F for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2004 08:22:44 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from aw1@stade.co.uk) Received: from alsager-adsl.stade.co.uk [81.6.222.119] (helo: access2.hanley.stade.co.uk) 1.155) id 4198674d.6ade.20c; Mon, 15 Nov 2004 08:22:37 +0000 Received: from titus.hanley.stade.co.uk (titus [192.168.1.5]) iAF8MaK1075944; Mon, 15 Nov 2004 08:22:36 GMT (envelope-from aw1@titus.hanley.stade.co.uk) Received: from titus.hanley.stade.co.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) iAF8MaoO083290; Mon, 15 Nov 2004 08:22:36 GMT (envelope-from aw1@titus.hanley.stade.co.uk) Received: (from aw1@localhost)iAF8MZpS083289; Mon, 15 Nov 2004 08:22:35 GMT (envelope-from aw1) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 08:22:35 +0000 From: Adrian Wontroba To: Andy Farkas Message-ID: <20041115082235.A82851@titus.hanley.stade.co.uk> Mail-Followup-To: Adrian Wontroba , Andy Farkas , stable@freebsd.org References: <20041115045912.A79200@titus.hanley.stade.co.uk> <20041115163209.W86833@bpgate.speednet.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <20041115163209.W86833@bpgate.speednet.com.au>; from andy@bradfieldprichard.com.au on Mon, Nov 15, 2004 at 04:49:56PM +1100 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 4.10-STABLE Organization: Oh dear, I've joined one again. cc: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: panic: APIC: Previous IPI is stuck X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: aw1@stade.co.uk List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 08:22:45 -0000 On Mon, Nov 15, 2004 at 04:49:56PM +1100, Andy Farkas wrote: > [freebsd.org is rejecting my email (cant find hostname) > so please feel free to copy this to the list] So quoted in full. > On Mon, 15 Nov 2004, Adrian Wontroba wrote: > ... > > The practice is that it it has now crashed three times in a couple of > > days with "panic: APIC: Previous IPI is stuck", the most recent one > > dragging me out from home early in a Monday morning. > > /me raises hand > > I still get panics too (5.3-STABLE cvsup'd last thursday). > At one stage I thought it was fixed, but I was wrong. > My box does not reboot itself either. > > > Over in current there are a couple of threads starting in late September > > where a few people are suffering this problem. Like them, I'm using an > > old (1997) Pentium Pro multiprocessor, in my case a 4 way Fujitsu M700. > > > > The machine is running with the SMP kernel (ie GENERIC + SMP), 4BSD > > scheduler, without preemption. > > Robert Watson has said it happens on his 4-way xeon box, > so its not the "old hardware" thats to blame. (My box is > an old Dell quad-ppro too). Something changed in the code > around the end of August this year. > > > I've set kern.sched.ipiwakeup.enabled=0 and crossed my fingers. > > Doesn't help. I already tried. Panic will still happen. Ah. Will it last the day I wonder? > > I'm a SMP novice. Would the machine become stable if I switched to a > > non-SMP kernel? Reliability is more important than speed in this case, > > and the opportunity for experimentation close to zero. Creditability > > has already been damaged by the gvinum RAID5 experience (8-( > > A UP kernel will probably run forever. The IPI panic can > only happen on SMP kernels. Thanks. I'll switch back to GENERIC. > > I'm not knocking 5.3 - in all other respects it seems wonderful. > > I'm not knocking 5.3 either, but it seems to its not quite > stable. Its more of ".0" release, where things are still > getting ironed out (like gvinum, which I also have problems > with). "RELENG_4: Time to die" - for all kinds of good reasons. It was time for 5-STABLE. The future release plan looks promising, but there is still the age old problem - how do you get the more of the user population to try out and find the problems in new versions before they acquire -RELEASE status? "Mea culpa" - I no longer have a "crash box". Time to get my mail off my own PPro (uniprocessor) box to free it up as such. If I had done this, I would have run into the vinum / gvinum issues in a less embarrassing fashion. > Stephan, you mentioned that the IPI code needs rewriting in order to > fix this problem... how's it going? > > - andyf -- Adrian Wontroba