From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Oct 19 19:15:07 2003 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 7A9F316A4B3 for ; Sun, 19 Oct 2003 19:15:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wildbean.clapper.org (yore.clapper.org [207.245.72.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF78A43F3F for ; Sun, 19 Oct 2003 19:15:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bmc@clapper.org) Received: from condor.inside.clapper.org (phantom@condor.inside.clapper.org [172.16.87.5])h9K2F3as012272; Sun, 19 Oct 2003 22:15:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from z.inside.clapper.org (z.inside.clapper.org [172.16.87.2]) h9K2F3UQ001925; Sun, 19 Oct 2003 22:15:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from z.inside.clapper.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) h9K2F2GI087650; Sun, 19 Oct 2003 22:15:03 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200310200215.h9K2F2GI087650@z.inside.clapper.org> From: Brian Clapper MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 22:15:02 -0400 To: Alex Povolotsky In-Reply-To: <20031020004036.658045a7.tarkhil@webmail.sub.ru> References: <20031020004036.658045a7.tarkhil@webmail.sub.ru> X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under Emacs 21.2.1 X-Face: /perrud9r1.|7j.*=/6)a%vZ$^sBn!P[?+}vWBxd1ps{4hd2ZOw8]u&t';}(kj=x; JpdSF7 1b<*T{.38]wnWl]j/ULRB*49qdsET_/)-siUd7A_n- List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 02:15:07 -0000 On 20 October, 2003, at 00:40 (+0400) Alex Povolotsky wrote: > Hello! > > I'm experiencing repeated (1-4 times a week) non-reproductable panics on 4.8-RELEASE-p13. Actually, they have begun with 4.5-RELEASE, and I hoped that upgrade helped me. > > Fatal trap 12: page fault while in kernel mode > mp_lock = 00000002; cpuid = 0; lapic.id = 03000000 > fault virtual address = 0x6c Here's another possibility. A year ago, I saw similar behavior with a brand new box on which I'd loaded 4.7-RELEASE. The problem was bad RAM, which memtest86 (www.memtest86.com) confirmed for me. I replaced the memory, and the problem hasn't recurred since. - Brian Clapper, http://www.clapper.org/bmc/