From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 11 Mar 2002 11:53:21 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 11 Mar 2002 11:53:11 -0500 Received: from lightning.swansea.linux.org.uk ([194.168.151.1]:20491 "EHLO the-village.bc.nu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 11 Mar 2002 11:53:07 -0500 Subject: Re: RH7.2 running 2.4.9-21-SMP (dual Xeon's) yields "Illegal instructions" To: tepperly@llnl.gov (Tom Epperly) Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 17:08:14 +0000 (GMT) Cc: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk (Alan Cox), linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <3C8CD629.5090003@llnl.gov> from "Tom Epperly" at Mar 11, 2002 08:07:05 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL6] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: From: Alan Cox Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > FYI when I upgraded to the 2.4.18-1smp kernel, the failure rate went > from 20% to 100%. I have tried running the nightly build & regression on > roughly 6 different dual processors Pentium III or better machines > (cylcing it over and over), and they all have intermittent failures of > one kind or another. All these machines are made by Dell, but they > provide some evidence that it is not a hardware problem. It does sound like either a bad compiler (eg gcc 3) which is unlikely but possible or your workload triggers something important and unusual which is buggy. Do you know which bit of the workload is the trigger - is it practical to find out ? Alan