Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 3 Apr 2014 21:01:30 -0400
From:      Chris Ross <cross+freebsd@distal.com>
To:        Kurt Lidl <lidl@pix.net>
Cc:        freebsd-sparc64@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: 10-stable sparc64 boot problems
Message-ID:  <5B6742B6-E757-494E-A212-2A3464634C46@distal.com>
In-Reply-To: <5330A5D4.5060400@pix.net>
References:  <9800ED26-6E2E-42F0-9641-3B9EDF653CE6@distal.com> <5330A5D4.5060400@pix.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mar 24, 2014, at 17:38 , Kurt Lidl <lidl@pix.net> wrote:
>>  I just updated my 10-stable sparc64 (Sun Fire v240) to a 10-stable =
kernel from revision 263676, which was the first one I found after the =
numerous failures over the weekend in route6d.  Reboot into single-user =
for mergemaster and install world, I attempted to reboot into multi-user =
the first two attempts yielded:
>>=20
>> Trying to mount root from zfs:zroot []...
>> Setting hostuuid: 94588820-cd20-11e1-b15b-0003bae34047.
>> Setting hostid: 0x4f9a5776.
>> Entropy harvesting: interrupts ethernet point_to_point swi.
>> Starting file system checks:
>> Mounting local file systems:.
>> Writing entropy file:.
>> Setting hostname: hostname.distal.com.
>> bge0: link state changed to DOWN
>> spin lock 0xc0c61cb0 (smp rendezvous) held by 0xfffff800054dcdb0 (tid =
100328) too long
>> timeout stopping cpus
>> panic: spin lock held too long
>> cpuid =3D 1
>> KDB: stack backtrace:
>> #0 0xc051fcf0 at _mtx_lock_spin_failed+0x50

> Fbsd-head has been failing this way on my v240 for a while.
> I posted about it here:
>=20
> =
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-sparc64/2014-March/009261.html
>=20
> I didn't get a chance to trace it back to the point where it happened =
before my cpu fan failed. (I think I sent you mail about that when
> it occured.)  I've received the used fan I bought from someone on
> Ebay, but I haven't cracked open the machine to put the fan
> into operation.  I really need to do that.

  Has anyone else seen this?  Has anyone made any efforts on searching =
for what/where the problem is?  Are there non-v240 systems that are =
running on March -current and/or April -stable that are _not_ seeing =
this problem?

  Thanks.  Just a little worried that I have a production system running =
code I know to be a bit unstable....

                                         - Chris





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5B6742B6-E757-494E-A212-2A3464634C46>