Hi,
I have this problem here on my system since starting to use kernel
2.6.13's release candidats. Attached you'll find the console output of
SuSE kernels 2.6.13 (OpenSuSE 10.0) and 2.6.13.2 (OpenSuSE 10.1). The
latter is "identical" to the output of a self compiled kernel
2.6.14-rc4, with the .config taken from 2.6.13.2's /proc/config.gz.
How can I further assist in solving this issue?
Bye.
--
Dipl.-Inform. (FH) Reinhard Nissl
mailto:[email protected]
1) Does this problem go way if you boot with maxcpus=1?
2) Does the problem go away if you not load the acpi processor module?
Looks somewhat similar to
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5331
Thanks,
-Venki
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [email protected]
>[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Reinhard Nissl
>Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 2:30 PM
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: processor module locks up hyperthreading enabled machine
>
>Hi,
>
>I have this problem here on my system since starting to use kernel
>2.6.13's release candidats. Attached you'll find the console output of
>SuSE kernels 2.6.13 (OpenSuSE 10.0) and 2.6.13.2 (OpenSuSE 10.1). The
>latter is "identical" to the output of a self compiled kernel
>2.6.14-rc4, with the .config taken from 2.6.13.2's /proc/config.gz.
>
>How can I further assist in solving this issue?
>
>Bye.
>--
>Dipl.-Inform. (FH) Reinhard Nissl
>mailto:[email protected]
>
Hi,
I'm sorry for the delay. Here are the results:
Pallipadi, Venkatesh wrote:
> 1) Does this problem go way if you boot with maxcpus=1?
No.
The modules are loaded via initrd and SuSE prints the name of the module
before loading it. So I get on console
Loading processor
ACPI: CPU0 (power states:C1[C1])
ACPI: CPU0 (power states:C1[C1])
Loading thermal
Loading fan
Waiting for device /dev/sda1 to appear: ok
Attempting manual resume
Loading jdb
Loading ext
Waiting for device /dev/sda2 to appear: ok
rootfs: major=8 minor=2 devn=2050
Then the system freezes.
Without the maxcpus argument the freeze happens already in front of the
above "Loading thermal" line.
> 2) Does the problem go away if you not load the acpi processor module?
Yes.
When I remove processor (and thermal as it has a dependency on
processor) to be loaded by initrd then the freeze happens at some time
later when acpid gets started, as SuSE loads these modules at that time
again in case they were not loaded already.
When I remove loading the processor (and thermal) module at this
location too, then the system is running ok so far besides the
restrictions which result from not loading these modules.
What should I try next?
Bye.
--
Dipl.-Inform. (FH) Reinhard Nissl
mailto:[email protected]
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Reinhard Nissl [mailto:[email protected]]
>Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 2:47 PM
>To: Pallipadi, Venkatesh
>Cc: [email protected]; Brown, Len
>Subject: Re: processor module locks up hyperthreading enabled machine
>
>Hi,
>
>I'm sorry for the delay. Here are the results:
Hmmmmm.... Please try the latest patch here
http://bugme.osdl.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5452
Thanks,
Venki
>
>Pallipadi, Venkatesh wrote:
>
>> 1) Does this problem go way if you boot with maxcpus=1?
>
>No.
>
>The modules are loaded via initrd and SuSE prints the name of
>the module
>before loading it. So I get on console
>
>Loading processor
>ACPI: CPU0 (power states:C1[C1])
>ACPI: CPU0 (power states:C1[C1])
>Loading thermal
>Loading fan
>Waiting for device /dev/sda1 to appear: ok
>Attempting manual resume
>Loading jdb
>Loading ext
>Waiting for device /dev/sda2 to appear: ok
>rootfs: major=8 minor=2 devn=2050
>
>Then the system freezes.
>
>Without the maxcpus argument the freeze happens already in
>front of the
>above "Loading thermal" line.
>
>> 2) Does the problem go away if you not load the acpi
>processor module?
>
>Yes.
>
>When I remove processor (and thermal as it has a dependency on
>processor) to be loaded by initrd then the freeze happens at some time
>later when acpid gets started, as SuSE loads these modules at
>that time
>again in case they were not loaded already.
>
>When I remove loading the processor (and thermal) module at this
>location too, then the system is running ok so far besides the
>restrictions which result from not loading these modules.
>
>What should I try next?
>
>Bye.
>--
>Dipl.-Inform. (FH) Reinhard Nissl
>mailto:[email protected]
>
Hi,
Pallipadi, Venkatesh wrote:
> Hmmmmm.... Please try the latest patch here
> http://bugme.osdl.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5452
Your patch fixed the freeze. Tested with kernel 2.6.14.
I should have mentioned, that my system is equiped with a
Fujitsu-Siemens Mainboard D1562-A2, most recent BIOS V4.06 R1.09.
I'll try to get this bug fixed in the BIOS, but chances are not that
good as the board is already "quite old".
Would you please be so kind and drop a few lines about the drawbacks of
this BIOS bug? What kind of functionality is lost by "ignoring" the
second CPU at this particular code section?
Thanks for your support!
Bye.
--
Dipl.-Inform. (FH) Reinhard Nissl
mailto:[email protected]
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Reinhard Nissl [mailto:[email protected]]
>Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 11:30 AM
>To: Pallipadi, Venkatesh
>Cc: [email protected]; Brown, Len
>Subject: Re: processor module locks up hyperthreading enabled machine
>
>Hi,
>
>Pallipadi, Venkatesh wrote:
>
>> Hmmmmm.... Please try the latest patch here
>> http://bugme.osdl.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5452
>
>Your patch fixed the freeze. Tested with kernel 2.6.14.
>
>I should have mentioned, that my system is equiped with a
>Fujitsu-Siemens Mainboard D1562-A2, most recent BIOS V4.06 R1.09.
>
>I'll try to get this bug fixed in the BIOS, but chances are not that
>good as the board is already "quite old".
>
>Would you please be so kind and drop a few lines about the
>drawbacks of
>this BIOS bug? What kind of functionality is lost by "ignoring" the
>second CPU at this particular code section?
>
It will basically disable ACPI Processor Power Management features.
P-state (speedstep or dynamic change of frequency to save power) and
C-states beyond C1 and T-states.
>From dmesg, I know that on your system C2 and beyond is not supported.
T-states are kind of unimportantish. Only other difference will be
P-state. Not sure whether your processor supports speedstep and dynamic
change of cpufreq. If it doesn't, then you won't loose anything by this
workaround.
Thanks,
Venki