Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because
the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
maybe relevant to this bug - these came up when I rebooted the host node and VMs:
kvm: 11517: cpu0 unhandled rdmsr: 0xc0011021
kvm: 11517: cpu0 unhandled rdmsr: 0xc0010112
kvm: 11517: cpu0 unhandled rdmsr: 0xc0010001
kvm: 11517: cpu1 unhandled rdmsr: 0xc0011021
Comment 3Kashyap Chamarthy
2014-02-08 13:33:02 UTC
Just dug this BZ up out of my backlog. I checked the customer portal and see the case is closed, but grabbed the sos report anyway. However, it must not be the same one, because this sos_commands/general/dmesg is for a 2.6.32-220.el6.x86_64 kernel, not 2.6.32-358.118.1.openstack.el6.x86_64, as above. Anyway, I'd prefer they move to 6.5.z and see if it reproduces there before putting too much effort into the issue. OTOH, the dmesg in this sos report does show soft lockups for qemu-kvm, but I also see evidence that tracing was enabled at the time. So, in any case, I don't believe we have good enough information for this [now closed] customer case in order to proceed. I'm going to close as INSU for now, of course it can be reopened if necessary.
(In reply to Andrew Jones from comment #4)
> Just dug this BZ up out of my backlog. I checked the customer portal and see
> the case is closed, but grabbed the sos report anyway. However, it must not
> be the same one, because this sos_commands/general/dmesg is for a
> 2.6.32-220.el6.x86_64 kernel, not 2.6.32-358.118.1.openstack.el6.x86_64, as
> above. Anyway, I'd prefer they move to 6.5.z and see if it reproduces there
> before putting too much effort into the issue. OTOH, the dmesg in this sos
> report does show soft lockups for qemu-kvm, but I also see evidence that
> tracing was enabled at the time. So, in any case, I don't believe we have
> good enough information for this [now closed] customer case in order to
> proceed. I'm going to close as INSU for now, of course it can be reopened if
> necessary.
Sounds reasonable - we're now at RHELv6.5 and kernel on the compute nodes ad the kernel is 2.6.32-431.5.1.el6.x86_64 and we haven't seen the soft-lockup since, I don't think.