Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 09:57:55 -0400 (EDT) From: Rob Watt <rob@thing.net> To: Don Lewis <truckman@freebsd.org> Cc: rob work <rob@hudson-trading.com>, mikep@hudson-trading.com, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Jason Carroll <jason@hudson-trading.com> Subject: Re: freebsd-5.4-stable panics Message-ID: <20051014092702.V67464@daemon.mistermishap.net> In-Reply-To: <20051013080849.F60486@daemon.mistermishap.net> References: <200510121925.j9CJPU5D048710@gw.catspoiler.org> <20051013080849.F60486@daemon.mistermishap.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 13 Oct 2005, Rob Watt wrote: > The test machine did panic. Unfortunately I was not running with > BREAK_TO_DEBUGGER. I will re-run the tests with all of the debugging > options we were using before, and then send you the trace info. Unfortunately I was not able to reproduce the panics with BREAK_TO_DEBUGGER compiled into the kernel. I have no log messages or core info from the first panic/reboot. We've been having other problems with our 5 machines, so it's possible (and likely) that the reboot I saw was unrelated to your patch. I ran our stress tests for about 14 more hours without incident. Before we were able to trigger the kern_proc bug on a 6.0 machine within 0-2 hours. We've only experienced the kern_proc bug in 6.0. The bugs we've experienced in 5.4 are multicast/network-threading related. So unfortunately the only thing we can really test for is whether the machine is still stable with your patch. I've had to put all of my test machines back into production running 6.0. If I can free a 5 SMP machine for more tests, I will do so, but at this point it would good if someone else can test the 5.4 patch. I can't post our simulations, but something similar to Antoine Pelisse's test program should be sufficient to see if the patch works. thanks for your help. - Rob Watt
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051014092702.V67464>