Created attachment 714124 [details] syslog file Description of problem: A back-trace is generated during the boot process. The generated back-trace does not break the boot process. The welcome screen is reached. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): F19a TC1 (anaconda 19.12) How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Boot Fedora-19-Alpha-TC1-x86_64-DVD.iso 2. the backtrace is generated, boot process continues 3. welcome screen is reached. Actual results: A backtrace, i can reach the welcome screen. Expected results: no back-traces Additional info: 22:00:57,157 INFO kernel:[ 8.872536] Console: switching to colour frame buffer device 160x64 22:00:57,157 INFO kernel:[ 9.038882] cirrus 0000:00:02.0: fb0: cirrusdrmfb frame buffer device 22:00:57,157 INFO kernel:[ 9.038884] cirrus 0000:00:02.0: registered panic notifier 22:00:57,157 INFO kernel:[ 9.044168] [drm] Initialized cirrus 1.0.0 20110418 for 0000:00:02.0 on minor 0 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.052222] 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.052316] ===================================== 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.052542] [ BUG: bad unlock balance detected! ] 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.052779] 3.9.0-0.rc3.git0.4.fc19.x86_64 #1 Not tainted 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] ------------------------------------- 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] plymouthd/283 is trying to release lock (&crtc->mutex) at: 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] [<ffffffff81719c8e>] mutex_unlock+0xe/0x10 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] but there are no more locks to release! 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] other info that might help us debug this: 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] no locks held by plymouthd/283. 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] stack backtrace: 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] Pid: 283, comm: plymouthd Not tainted 3.9.0-0.rc3.git0.4.fc19.x86_64 #1 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] Call Trace: 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] [<ffffffff81719c8e>] ? mutex_unlock+0xe/0x10 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] [<ffffffff810d6b5c>] print_unlock_imbalance_bug+0xec/0x100 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] [<ffffffff81719c8e>] ? mutex_unlock+0xe/0x10 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] [<ffffffff810db58e>] lock_release+0x25e/0x310 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] [<ffffffff81719bab>] __mutex_unlock_slowpath+0x9b/0x170 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] [<ffffffff81719c8e>] mutex_unlock+0xe/0x10 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] [<ffffffffa01af579>] drm_modeset_unlock_all+0x39/0x60 [drm] 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] [<ffffffffa01b3c64>] drm_mode_addfb+0x1a4/0x1b0 [drm] 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] [<ffffffffa01a3421>] drm_ioctl+0x501/0x5c0 [drm] 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] [<ffffffffa01b3ac0>] ? drm_mode_cursor_ioctl+0x130/0x130 [drm] 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] [<ffffffff812f25f6>] ? inode_has_perm.isra.48.constprop.64+0x56/0x80 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] [<ffffffff811edd35>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x305/0x530 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] [<ffffffff812f29db>] ? selinux_file_ioctl+0x5b/0x110 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] [<ffffffff811edfe1>] sys_ioctl+0x81/0xa0 22:00:57,157 WARNING kernel:[ 9.053022] [<ffffffff81726a19>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b 22:00:57,157 INFO kernel:[ 9.185094] vdb: unknown partition table
Created attachment 714126 [details] X.org log file
Created attachment 714127 [details] anaconda.log
Created attachment 714128 [details] program.log
Created attachment 714129 [details] screenshot
The criteria only require virtualization to work at Beta, and then only N on N and N on N-1, not N on N-2. For me, both 19 on 19 and 19 on 18 work at present. So I'm -1 to this.
Discussed at 2013-03-27 blocker review meeting: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-blocker-review/2013-03-27/f19alpha-blocker-review-3.2013-03-27-16.01.log.txt . Rejected as a blocker: virt is not required for Alpha, qxl is preferred to cirrus, and N-on-N-2 is not a required config anyway...
Assigning to correct component. FWIW, airlied/ajax say we *really* want to get people off using Cirrus for VMs, qxl is much better supported; please switch to qxl/Spice if you can.
> FWIW, airlied/ajax say we *really* want to get people off using > Cirrus for VMs, qxl is much better supported; please switch to > qxl/Spice if you can. @Adam I am aware of it, all my stuff uses spice/qlx since quite some time, and yes, it is much better. I was just testing cirrus. I tested it again with F19b TC4 and i did not see it. It appears this can be closed.
Great, thanks for testing.