Bug 479427

Summary: General protection fault on shutdown (kernel-2.6.29-0.19.rc0.git9.fc11.x86_64)
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Tom London <selinux>
Component: kernelAssignee: Kernel Maintainer List <kernel-maint>
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: low    
Version: rawhideCC: antonio.montagnani, kernel-maint, quintela
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2009-01-15 17:30:24 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Attachments:
Description Flags
Picture of screen with GPF on shutdown
none
Picture of screen with GPF on shutdown none

Description Tom London 2009-01-09 14:57:39 UTC
Created attachment 328553 [details]
Picture of screen with GPF on shutdown

Description of problem:
I regularly get a General Protection Fault on shutdown (followed by a hang).

Attach a picture of the screen with the errors.

RIP says __stop_machine

Call trace (to my best ability):

_cpu_down
disable_nonboot_cpus
kernel_power_off
sys_reboot
.....

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
kernel-2.6.29-0.19.rc0.git9.fc11.x86_64

How reproducible:
Very frequent.

Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.
  
Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:

Comment 1 Tom London 2009-01-09 15:10:48 UTC
Created attachment 328556 [details]
Picture of screen with GPF on shutdown

this picture really is for kernel-2.6.29-0.19.rc0.git9.fc11.x86_64.

[Previous attachment was for kernel-2.6.29-0.18.rc0.git9.fc11.x86_64]

Comment 2 Christopher Beland 2009-01-12 08:06:52 UTC
I experienced a similar problem, which seems to be fixed in kernel-2.6.29-0.25.rc0.git14.fc11.x86_64.

Comment 3 Tom London 2009-01-12 14:25:26 UTC
I haven't seen this since 0.25, and it has not reappeared so far with 0.29.

I'll monitor for a few days and close if it does not occur.....