On Friday 26 October 2007 17:05:42, you wrote： > On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 15:32 +0800, Wang, Baojun wrote: > > > Perhaps he has any tasks stuck in 'D' state? If so, SysRq-t output for > > > these would be a good thing to collect. What leads him to suspect the > > > process scheduler, etc. More details are needed. > > > > The task is S+ state, please see in the attachment tarball, SysRq-t > > output has also been attached, I wish it would help. I doubt it's the CFS > > problem because it's first introduced into the 2.6.23 kernel. > > (yeah, but there were a truckload of other changes as well) > > Looking at your data, _my_ first suspect would be the 2.6.22->2.6.23 > futex changes. I'd revert all of the changes to kernel/futex.c and > kernel/futex_compat.c, and see if the problem went away. If it didn't, > I'd then do a full git bisect to nail it down. > > -Mike Thanks very much, also my glibc (2.6.1) is built under 2.6.23 (but not linux-headers, which is 2.6.22). but I've tried right now (install ELDK4.1) on another x86_64 machine, without any problem (x86_64, Core2Duo E6600, 4G RAM) Wang -- Wang, Baojun Lanzhou University Distributed & Embedded System Lab http://dslab.lzu.edu.cn School of Information Science and Engeneering [email protected] Tianshui South Road 222. Lanzhou 730000 .P.R.China Tel:+86-931-8912025 Fax:+86-931-8912022
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
- Prev by Date: Re: USB: FIx locks and urb->status in adutux
- Next by Date: Re: Linux Security *Module* Framework (Was: LSM conversion to static interface)
- Previous by thread: Re: kernel 2.6.23 CFS problem?
- Next by thread: [PATCH] x86: bitops_32.h style cleanups
- Index(es):
 |