On Fri, 4 Aug 2000, Simon Kirby wrote:
> Hmm... the lockup I got the first time I tried to see what was happening
> is different from this one (which happened the second time), but it seems
> to be similar:
>
> Trace; c014c700 <ext2_get_block+64/59c>
> Trace; c014c70c <ext2_get_block+70/59c>
> Trace; c014c721 <ext2_get_block+85/59c>
> Trace; c014c730 <ext2_get_block+94/59c>
> Trace; c014c73a <ext2_get_block+9e/59c>
> Trace; c014c74f <ext2_get_block+b3/59c>
> Trace; c014c751 <ext2_get_block+b5/59c>
> Trace; c014c8ba <ext2_get_block+21e/59c>
> Trace; c014c960 <ext2_get_block+2c4/59c>
> Trace; c014c98c <ext2_get_block+2f0/59c>
> Trace; c014c994 <ext2_get_block+2f8/59c>
> Trace; c014c9a9 <ext2_get_block+30d/59c>
> Trace; c014c9ae <ext2_get_block+312/59c>
> Trace; c014c9b0 <ext2_get_block+314/59c>
> Trace; c014c9c2 <ext2_get_block+326/59c>
> Trace; c014c9c4 <ext2_get_block+328/59c>
> Trace; c014c9db <ext2_get_block+33f/59c>
> Trace; c014c9f3 <ext2_get_block+357/59c>
> Trace; c014ca04 <ext2_get_block+368/59c>
> Trace; c014ca0e <ext2_get_block+372/59c>
> Trace; c014ca1b <ext2_get_block+37f/59c>
> Trace; c014ca24 <ext2_get_block+388/59c>
> Trace; c014ca26 <ext2_get_block+38a/59c>
> Trace; c014cc00 <ext2_get_block+564/59c>
> Trace; c022acb6 <stext_lock+2112/86d8>
> Trace; c022acbd <stext_lock+2119/86d8>
_That_ was a stack trace??? Could you cut the single oops out of your log
and post/mail it?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 07 2000 - 21:00:14 EST