Messages in this thread | | | From | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <> | Subject | Re: Which is simpler? (Was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: [ 00/10] [Suspend2] Modules support.) | Date | Mon, 20 Feb 2006 21:11:52 +0100 |
| |
On Monday 20 February 2006 20:45, Lee Revell wrote: > On Mon, 2006-02-20 at 15:54 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > I know I am bad for not reporting that earlier but swsusp was > > working > > > OK for me till about 3 month ago when I started getting "soft lockup > > > detected on CPU0" with no useable backtrace 3 times out of 4. I > > > somehow suspect that having automounted nfs helps it to fail > > > somehow... > > > > Disable soft lockup watchdog :-). > > You do know that message is harmless and doesn't actually do anything > right? It's just warning you that the kernel allowed something to hog > the CPU without rescheduling for a LONG time.
This particular one is almost certainly a false-positive. Still it doesn't mean we shouldn't try to get rid of it.
Greetings, Rafael - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |