linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: do_ri failure in cache flushing routines

To: Pete Popov <ppopov@mvista.com>
Subject: Re: do_ri failure in cache flushing routines
From: G H <giles67@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 13:16:43 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org
In-reply-to: <411277BD.7070108@mvista.com>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
At the moment I don't have the board set up for using kgdb and it's complicated by the fact that we only have one serial console port. But I am looking into setting it up for kgdb now.
 
As far as stressing the system, it doesn't have enough resources ( disk space ) to be able to compile the kernel, but we did write a simple program that would stress the system by spawning multiple threads, each one performing floating point calculations. With this test, top reported a load average of over 400 and we have seen no failure so far.

Pete Popov <ppopov@mvista.com> wrote:
G H wrote:

> I've not had much response to this question so I would like to
> rephrase it :
>
> Can anyone think of any possible scenario where do_ri could occur in
> blast_icache32() ??
>
> Is this possibly a cache synchronisation problem ??
>

Could be a hardware memory glitch. I would use kgdb to put a breakpoint
there and see what the data in memory looks like when this happens --
look for memory corruption, etc.

Pete

> TIA
>
> >While testing out an amd au1500 based board I have been getting "
> do_ri " exceptions >that always occur in the cache flushing routines.
> More often than not in >blast_icache_32().
>
> >So far this has mainly happened after running the board for days on
> end while running >multiple telnet sessions to it. It has sometimes (
> quite rarely ) happened after a few >hours to a day of multiple telnet
> session use.
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>


Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>