2.1.102 kernel

2.1.102 kernel

Post by Robert Hyat » Thu, 21 May 1998 04:00:00



Just a short note...  I've been running 2.1.102 since it came out
last week, and, to date, have had no panics, no oopses, no ughs,
no aiee!!'s nor anything else untoward, running with 4 pentium
pro cpus, reading writing big disk files, lots of net traffic,
PPP connections, Xwindows, and all the other assorted stuff one
does with Linux.

Looks good...  In fact, the last dozen versions or so have been
rock solid for me, at least starting with 2.1.97 and working
forward, although 2.1.91 and later looked pretty good.

Looks like progress... waiting on Linus's new "looks so good it
must be right" interrupt handler and version 2.1.103 now.  :)

--
Robert Hyatt                    Computer and Information Sciences

(205) 934-2213                  115A Campbell Hall, UAB Station
(205) 934-5473 FAX              Birmingham, AL 35294-1170

 
 
 

2.1.102 kernel

Post by Wayne Hyd » Thu, 21 May 1998 04:00:00



> Just a short note...  I've been running 2.1.102 since it came out
> last week, and, to date, have had no panics, no oopses, no ughs,
> no aiee!!'s nor anything else untoward, running with 4 pentium
> pro cpus, reading writing big disk files, lots of net traffic,
> PPP connections, Xwindows, and all the other assorted stuff one
> does with Linux.
> Looks good...  In fact, the last dozen versions or so have been
> rock solid for me, at least starting with 2.1.97 and working
> forward, although 2.1.91 and later looked pretty good.
> Looks like progress... waiting on Linus's new "looks so good it
> must be right" interrupt handler and version 2.1.103 now.  :)

I haven't bothered updating to .102 as .101 is working great for me.
(Hopefully there isn't an important reason to do so)  My uptime is
currently 10+ days, and I have been trying to make it fall over without
success.  The system is a dual PPro, btw, so SMP works fine for me.  I
did have problems with 2.1.99, but it may have been due to the software
RAID.  I've since split up the scsi disks to a non-RAID config.  (seven
HD's, two SyJet's, CD, and tape over three BusLogic controllers -- two
958, one 948)  

Has anyone had any problems with the md driver on recent 2.1 kernels?  I
got a bunch of solid freezes and a few "Inactive in
scsi_request_queuable" messages sent to the console.  I don't know if it
actually was the md driver, but I'm working fine without it now.  I
upgraded to .101 from .99, so that might have resolved the problem and
the md driver was really safe in the first place.  (I was using RAID0
with a good tape backup schedule.)

For the first five days my load average was about 5.5 with a few large
compiles being done over and over, etc.  Since then I've toned it down
to about 2.0 to 3.0 with rc5 cracks and mp3 encoding and a bunch of
network activity.  The Linux box is my http/ftp (squid) cache, handles
my ppp connection and masqurading -- it has two network cards (one 10Mb
to a SPARC4 and a 100Mb to a hub w/ a Win95 box and sometimes others).
Pretty sad when I'm using a SPARC4 only as an xterm into my PC Linux
box....  

The only thing I haven't stressed is the sound.  I've pretty much been
playing mp3's on the Win95 box.  

-Wayne

 
 
 

2.1.102 kernel

Post by Sid Boyc » Sun, 24 May 1998 04:00:00



> Just a short note...  I've been running 2.1.102 since it came out
> last week, and, to date, have had no panics, no oopses, no ughs,
> no aiee!!'s nor anything else untoward, running with 4 pentium
> pro cpus, reading writing big disk files, lots of net traffic,
> PPP connections, Xwindows, and all the other assorted stuff one
> does with Linux.

> Looks good...  In fact, the last dozen versions or so have been
> rock solid for me, at least starting with 2.1.97 and working
> forward, although 2.1.91 and later looked pretty good.

> Looks like progress... waiting on Linus's new "looks so good it
> must be right" interrupt handler and version 2.1.103 now.  :)

> --
> Robert Hyatt                    Computer and Information Sciences

> (205) 934-2213                  115A Campbell Hall, UAB Station
> (205) 934-5473 FAX              Birmingham, AL 35294-1170

        I've had 2.1.103 up since early Friday and it's rock solid, 2.2 can't be very
far away.
        Some good things have gone into 2.1.x, the 64 Meg "limit" has disappeared, just
plug the memory in and switch on.
        One thing that caught me on the hop was "ipchains", profuse documentation,
except none of the examples fitted a simple masquerading example, when all else
had failed, there was only "forward" to work on and it did the trick. I did it
on the fly in 2.1.102, did ipchains-save, but when I rebooted on 2.1.103,
"ipchains-restore" just sat there complaining and the login prompt never
appeared, so I booted up off tomsrbt, edited my script to remove it and replaced
it with a ipchains command.
Regards
--
... Sid Boyce...Amdahl(Europe)...44-121 422 0375
                   -----------------------------------
Any opinions expressed above are mine and do not necessarily represent
 the opinions or policies of Amdahl Corporation.
 
 
 

1. "kernel BUG at page_alloc.c:102!" (kernel 2.4.20)

Greetings.

On a relatively idle system (used mainly for syslog things) that had
been up for ~42 days, kswapd croaked and the kernel claimed (sorry if
these lines are wrapped):

kernel BUG at page_alloc.c:102!
invalid operand: 0000
CPU:    0
EIP:    0010:[__free_pages_ok+68/656]    Tainted: P
EFLAGS: 00010286
eax: c11703ec   ebx: c151fabc   ecx: c151fad8   edx: c0254c9c
esi: 00000000   edi: 00000010   ebp: 000001f5   esp: c16f5f14
ds: 0018   es: 0018   ss: 0018
Process kswapd (pid: 5, stackpage=c16f5000)
Stack: d7b64dc0 c151fabc 00000010 000001f5 c0136d2c c151fabc 000001d0 00000010
       000001f5 c01351b9 d7b64dc0 c151fabc c012cb52 c012db8b c012cb8b 00000020
       000001d0 00000020 00000006 00000006 c16f4000 000021dd 000001d0 c0254e34
Call Trace:    [try_to_free_buffers+140/224] [try_to_release_page+73/80] [shrink_cache+498/784] [__free_pages+27/32] [shrink_cache+555/784]
  [shrink_caches+86/128] [try_to_free_pages_zone+60/96] [kswapd_balance_pgdat+65/144] [kswapd_balance+22/48] [kswapd+157/192] [kernel_thread+40/64]

Code: 0f 0b 66 00 53 f6 21 c0 89 d8 2b 05 f0 20 2b c0 69 c0 a3 8b

The box is essentially a LinuxFromScratch (actually a severely
overhauled SuSE 6.2) box.  Vanilla kernel 2.4.20 (no patches), glibc
2.2.5, gcc 2.95.3.  It's all running on an Abit KT7A mainboard (Athlon
1.4GHz) with 640MB or so of RAM.

I rebooted the box but it hung when trying to turn off swap.  :-)  (BTW,
is there a means by which to "restart" kswapd if need be?)

I've been using 2.4.20 since a few days after its release.  This is the
first time I've seen this "kernel BUG"; I have absolutely no idea what
triggered it, nor how to reproduce it.

If you need more info, just ask!

Regards,
krjw.
--
Keith R. John Warno                         [SA, Valaran Corporation]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

2. Booting problems on a PowerStack

3. IP Masquerading on kernel 2.1.102

4. Xfree86 3.2 for OS2 hangs when SLIP connected

5. load with kernels 100/102

6. remote access to a samba server

7. kernel BUG at page_alloc.c:102

8. status of rmksysb script

9. 2.4.20 - kernel BUG at page_alloc.c:102!

10. kernel BUG at page_alloc.c:102!

11. kernel 2.4.20 and a bug in page_alloc.c in 102 line.

12. kernel BUG at page_alloc.c:102!

13. 2.1.102 breaks my network connection