From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753201Ab1H3WnN (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Aug 2011 18:43:13 -0400 Received: from out3.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.27]:59724 "EHLO out3.smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752446Ab1H3WnM (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Aug 2011 18:43:12 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: XZyIN7fuRg1jPJBqsyv7szUxdOrLEcOs3xtZLisKFN9w 1314744191 Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 15:38:29 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Faidon Liambotis Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com, Peter Zijlstra , MINOURA Makoto , Ingo Molnar , stable@kernel.org, =?iso-8859-1?Q?Herv=E9?= Commowick , john stultz , Rand@jasper.es, Andrew Morton , Willy Tarreau Subject: Re: [stable] 2.6.32.21 - uptime related crashes? Message-ID: <20110830223829.GB17450@kroah.com> References: <20110712041938.GO27254@1wt.eu> <1310690138.3367.61.camel@work-vm> <1310724097.2586.296.camel@twins> <1310752795.2945.4.camel@work-vm> <20110721072256.GE9216@elte.hu> <1311251098.29152.130.camel@twins> <20110721125008.GF11246@pcnci.linuxbox.cz> <1311252799.29152.147.camel@twins> <20110721184524.GB381@elte.hu> <20110825185616.GA17078@faidon.noc.grnet.gr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110825185616.GA17078@faidon.noc.grnet.gr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 09:56:16PM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote: > On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 08:45:25PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 2011-07-21 at 14:50 +0200, Nikola Ciprich wrote: > > > > thanks for the patch! I'll put this on our testing boxes... > > > > > > With a patch that frobs the starting value close to overflowing I hope, > > > otherwise we'll not hear from you in like 7 months ;-) > > > > > > > Are You going to push this upstream so we can ask Greg to push this to > > > > -stable? > > > > > > Yeah, I think we want to commit this with a -stable tag, Ingo? > > > > yeah - and we also want a Reported-by tag and an explanation of how > > it can crash and why it matters in practice. I can then stick it into > > the urgent branch for Linus. (probably will only hit upstream in the > > merge window though.) > > Has this been pushed or has the problem been solved somehow? Time is > against us on this bug as more boxes will crash as they reach 200 days > of uptime... > > In any case, feel free to use me as a Reported-by, my full report of the > problem being <20110430173905.GA25641@tty.gr>. > > FWIW and if I understand correctly, my symptoms were caused by *two* > different bugs: > a) the 54 bits wraparound at 208 days that Peter fixed above, > b) a kernel crash at ~215 days related to RT tasks, fixed by > 305e6835e05513406fa12820e40e4a8ecb63743c (already in -stable). So, what do I do here as part of the .32-longterm kernel? Is there a fix that is in Linus's tree that I need to apply here? confused, greg k-h