Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 18 Feb 2003 11:59:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 18 Feb 2003 11:59:40 -0500 Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com ([204.127.198.39]:56995 "EHLO rwcrmhc53.attbi.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 18 Feb 2003 11:59:39 -0500 Subject: Re: "Unknown HZ value! (0) Assume 100." Wraparound bug? From: Albert Cahalan To: matt@theBachChoir.org.uk Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.5 Date: 18 Feb 2003 12:05:52 -0500 Message-Id: <1045587953.3174.278.camel@cube> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1161 Lines: 30 Matt Bernstein writes: > Two of our machines (one running 2.4.18-xfs-ipsec, one > running 2.4.19-pre10-ac2) started spitting this message > before some commands (might be in Debian procps 2.0.7-8) > after an uptime of about 248 days (certainly in the latter > case, probably the same in the former). > > This smells a bit as about 248 is about half of about 497, > which was a trigger (which I managed to hit :) in the > mid 2.1.x series for the uptime counter to wrap. Yep. Debian-unstable has procps-3.1.5 now, which won't emit this message with 2.4.xx and 2.5.xx kernels. Your system is still inconsistant though, so rebooting would be a good idea. (processes may appear to have been started in the future and run for negative time) The recent 2.5.xx kernels should be able to handle huge uptimes better; you'll need the procps-3.1.6 release for the most recent 2.5.xx kernels though. http://procps.sf.net/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/