On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 05:26:23PM -0800, Darren Hart wrote: | On 11/17/2010 11:11 AM, Nathan Grennan wrote: | >I have been working for weeks to get a stable rt kernel. I had been | >focusing on 2.6.31.6-rt19. It is stable for about four days under stress | >testing before it soft locks. I am using rt19 instead of rt21, because | >rt19 seems to be more stable. The rtmutex issue that seems to still be | >in rt29 is in rt21. I also had to backport the iptables fix to rt19. | > | >I just started looking at 2.6.33.7-rt29 again, since I can reproduce a | >soft lock with it in 10-15 minutes. I have yet to get sysrq output for | >rt19, since it takes four days. The soft lock with rt29 as far as I can | >tell seems to relate to disk i/o. | > | >There are links to two logs of rt29 from a serial console below. They | >include sysrq output like "Show Blocked State" and "Show State". The | >level7 file is with nfsd enable, and level9 is with it disable. So nfsd | >doesn't seem to be the issue. | > | >If any other debugging information is useful or needed, just say the word. | | A reproducible test-case is always the first thing we ask for :-) | What is your stress test? | | What policy and priority are you running your load at? Are you | providing enough cycles for the system threads to run? I noticed a e1000e warning on the first log. Those are usually harmful. You may also want to boot your kernel with "ignore_loglevel debug initcall_debug" appended to your kernel command line. The real issue or the important warning may happen during the boot process. Luis -- [ Luis Claudio R. Goncalves Bass - Gospel - RT ] [ Fingerprint: 4FDD B8C4 3C59 34BD 8BE9 2696 7203 D980 A448 C8F8 ] -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
