Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 142862
Hostnames at a glance
Last modified: 2007-11-30 17:10:56 EST
From Bugzilla Helper: User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20041020 Epiphany/1.4.4 Description of problem: If you have a lot of computers, it's helpful to see, at a glance, which computer is which just by looking at the screen. It would be nice if these was an option to set the wallpaper for a machine to its hostname. It would also be nice to have a text screensaver showing the same thing. (and it would be nicer still to have a transparent screensaver showing what the machine is doing) Not sure where to assign. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: x Additional info:
----- Additional Comments From gjlynx@us.ibm.com(prefers email via gjohnson@austin.ibm.com) 2004-12-14 13:43 EDT ------- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=142861
Can you give me permission to view the bug? Thanks.
----- Additional Comments From moilanen@us.ibm.com(prefers email via moilanen@austin.ibm.com) 2004-12-14 14:47 EDT ------- DEBUG_SLAB is a config option under: Kernel Hacking -> Debug memory allocations
----- Additional Comments From salina@us.ibm.com 2004-12-14 16:01 EDT ------- Carlos, reboot the machine. I rebuild kernel for you.
----- Additional Comments From salina@us.ibm.com 2004-12-14 16:02 EDT ------- Jake, You want to use this kernel or latest David Howell kernel ?
----- Additional Comments From ameet@us.ibm.com 2004-12-14 16:14 EDT ------- I did some disassembly. I could not objdump the entire trace, so I had to use the one provided by xmon. In hash_page function, read_lock(&pte_hash_lock[smp_processor_id()]); <--this is instr ldx r0,r9,r6 ptep = find_linux_pte(pgdir, ea); /* * If no pte found or not present, send the problem up to * do_page_fault */ if (ptep && pte_present(*ptep)) <--- this is cmpdi cr7,r6,0. { ret = __hash_page(ea, access, vsid, ptep); } else { /* If no pte, send the problem up to do_page_fault */ ret = 1; <--- Going with Jake's comment, I think it fails here. } ------------------------------- #define pte_present(pte) (pte_val(pte) & (_PAGE_P | _PAGE_PROTNONE)) #define pte_val(x) ((x).pte)
Created attachment 108573 [details] "FVTR_SDET.sh"
----- Additional Comments From scarlos@us.ibm.com 2004-12-14 17:18 EDT ------- SDET script You can run this script with the new kernel. to try and recreate.
----- Additional Comments From scarlos@us.ibm.com 2004-12-14 17:19 EDT ------- SDET completed successfully on Power 4 650 box hostname: ppc64hlp6.ltc.austin.ibm.com ip: 9.3.190.136 uid: root pwd: .pasroot
----- Additional Comments From scarlos@us.ibm.com 2004-12-14 17:31 EDT ------- The test was successful on power 4 650 and power 5 HV2 on RHEL4 pre-RC1
----- Additional Comments From scarlos@us.ibm.com 2004-12-14 17:40 EDT ------- Steps to run SDET: 1. mkdir /skyline 2. mount 9.3.192.95:/home/public /skyline 3. ./FVTR_SDET.sh
----- Additional Comments From robbiew@us.ibm.com 2004-12-14 17:47 EDT ------- This test passed on a Power4 AND an HV2 (Power5) with a higher version of firmware. We will flash this particular SF2 to the same level and attempt a recreate.
----- Additional Comments From khoa@us.ibm.com 2004-12-14 18:26 EDT ------- Until we know more about this problem, I'd like to keep this bug in HIGH severity. If this turns out to be a true data corruption/miscompare problem, we would need to bump the severity up at that point. Thanks.
----- Additional Comments From salina@us.ibm.com 2004-12-14 19:05 EDT ------- Carlos udpated firmware.. SDET restarted. Robbie will keep track and update.
Erm, IBM people - this bug number is for a "hostnames as wallpaper" request, not a kernel bug..
Uhm? What the heck? Glen: Why are you adding some kernel stuff to this bug?
----- Additional Comments From robbiew@us.ibm.com 2004-12-15 11:30 EDT ------- Test Run Update - The test is still running and the machine is still up and responsive. :)
----- Additional Comments From robbiew@us.ibm.com 2004-12-15 16:31 EDT ------- Test update - Still running with no problems.
----- Additional Comments From robbiew@us.ibm.com 2004-12-16 11:00 EDT ------- Testing completed without problems.
----- Additional Comments From mjwolf@us.ibm.com 2004-12-16 12:15 EDT ------- testing completed on the FW that originally exhibited the problem or the updated FW? If the tests completed on the updated FW, please put the 'older' FW on and re-run the test. Want to make sure this problem can be recreated.
----- Additional Comments From robbiew@us.ibm.com 2004-12-16 12:22 EDT ------- It completed with the new FW. Comment #28 stated that the tester was able to recreate twice on the older FW. What do we gain by going back to the older FW and recreating for a third time?
----- Additional Comments From scheel@us.ibm.com 2004-12-16 14:16 EDT ------- We need root cause for this defect, even if it means going back to old firmware.
----- Additional Comments From robbiew@us.ibm.com 2004-12-17 11:10 EDT ------- I flashed the machine to the oldest firmware available from the firmware download site...and the test still passed. I was put in contact with someone who can get the actual old level I need (b0824a_0434.220). As soon as I receive this level, I will flash and re-test.
----- Additional Comments From robbiew@us.ibm.com 2004-12-17 13:01 EDT ------- I've flashed to b0824a_0434.220 and will update on the status of the recreate attempt.
----- Additional Comments From robbiew@us.ibm.com 2004-12-20 10:55 EDT ------- Ran the test for the full 24 hours with b0824a_0434.220 and no recreate. I think all we can do now is close as unreproducible.
----- Additional Comments From robbiew@us.ibm.com 2004-12-20 11:04 EDT ------- Closing as unreproducible. We will run this again on the next RC2 (12/20) release, on this same machine and firmware...to make sure.
----- Additional Comments From moilanen@us.ibm.com(prefers email via moilanen@austin.ibm.com) 2005-01-10 10:47 EST ------- Reclosing as unreproducable. Please reopen if it's hit again.
changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REJECTED |CLOSED ------- Additional Comments From scarlos@us.ibm.com 2005-03-08 09:56 EST ------- ok will try on latest RHEL4 RC3 again and see if it reoccurs. Will Close for now.