From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 2 14:27:45 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF2161065670 for ; Tue, 2 Dec 2008 14:27:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hk@alogis.com) Received: from alogis.com (firewall.solit-ag.de [212.184.102.1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EDDE8FC14 for ; Tue, 2 Dec 2008 14:27:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hk@alogis.com) Received: from alogis.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alogis.com (8.13.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id mB2ED2IK002934; Tue, 2 Dec 2008 15:13:02 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from hk@alogis.com) Received: (from hk@localhost) by alogis.com (8.13.4/8.13.1/Submit) id mB2ED25C002933; Tue, 2 Dec 2008 15:13:02 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from hk) Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2008 15:13:02 +0100 From: Holger Kipp To: Jurriaan Nijkamp Message-ID: <20081202141302.GA2745@intserv.int1.b.intern> References: <200812020920.mB29K3ox098098@freefall.freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200812020920.mB29K3ox098098@freefall.freebsd.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: amd64/129238: [panic] System randomly panics X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2008 14:27:46 -0000 On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 09:20:03AM +0000, Jurriaan Nijkamp wrote: > The following reply was made to PR amd64/129238; it has been noted by GNATS. > > From: "Jurriaan Nijkamp" > To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, > alias@jurrie.net > Cc: > Subject: Re: amd64/129238: [panic] System randomly panics > Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2008 08:13:22 +0100 (CET) > > After another crash yesterday, I got a new dump which, according to > someone who knows what he's talking about, is actually useful. He also > said the problem may lie with faulty memory, but I must say I did a > memtest86+ test last week which said my memory was working perfectly. I once had a board (high quality) with memory (high quality) with memory problems - ie a simple make -j8 buildworld would reliably panic the system, but running memtest for hours did not show any problems. It turned out to be a timing issue - we did hit exactly the combination of memory and mainboard that didn't work well together. We swapped memory with a different system and both were running fine afterwards. So please do not rely on output of memtest alone - it is not stressing the system the way real applications do. > I am pasting the output of kgdb below. Can't comment on kgdb-output. Sorry. Regards, Hoger Kipp