1 |
Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
> On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 4:13 PM, <covici@××××××××××.com> wrote: |
4 |
> > Hi. I am getting some kind of kernel panick in 4.2.1 -- it boots up OK, |
5 |
> > ... |
6 |
> > how |
7 |
> > do I get any information about what happened -- serial console or other |
8 |
> > means? Can I do a console over the network without additional hardware? |
9 |
> |
10 |
> That is pretty simple actually. |
11 |
> |
12 |
> Set CONFIG_NETCONSOLE=y/m in your kernel config if it is not already set. |
13 |
> add to your kernel command line: |
14 |
> netconsole=6666@192.168.0.10/eth0,6666@192.168.0.5/1c:6f:65:ab:07:b2 |
15 |
> |
16 |
> (The first set of values is port@src-ip/interface. The second set of |
17 |
> values is port@dest-ip/MAC. This is low-level code in the kernel so |
18 |
> it is just sending raw UDP packets - the routine sending them has no |
19 |
> idea what your interface IP is, and it can't use ARP.) |
20 |
> |
21 |
> On the destination machine, run "nc -u -l -p 6666" |
22 |
> |
23 |
> That will listen for console output and dump it to stdout. You'll get |
24 |
> everything that goes to dmesg on the remote machine, including |
25 |
> BUG/PANIC/etc output. It works fine even if the disks stop syncing. |
26 |
> |
27 |
> > |
28 |
> > The reason I went with that kernel is because I want to try btrfs and |
29 |
> > they develop fast, so it looked from Google searching that I should be |
30 |
> > on 4.2 or thereabouts. The btrfs programs I emerged did say 4.2. |
31 |
> > |
32 |
> |
33 |
> If you're having btrfs issues on such a recent kernel you should |
34 |
> probably at least run all the backports that are available for it. |
35 |
> |
36 |
> There are undoubtedly many btrfs issues in 4.2.1 that have been fixed |
37 |
> in 4.2.3, so you should probably be running this version if you want |
38 |
> to stick with 4.2. |
39 |
> |
40 |
> Personally, I've been sticking with 3.18 until 4.1 quiets down. There |
41 |
> are usually regressions in any new kernel version with btrfs. |
42 |
> |
43 |
> > So, I would like to go on two paths at once -- find out about the |
44 |
> > panick, and maybe go to a lower kernel as well, but I was concerned |
45 |
> > about btrfs if I do that. I have not created the pool yet. |
46 |
> |
47 |
> Generally speaking the btrfs on-disk format is stable, so for the most |
48 |
> part you can switch back and forth between versions without issue. If |
49 |
> you want to go to a really old kernel series like maybe 3.12 there |
50 |
> might be a few optional btrfs features that won't work, but in general |
51 |
> I'd stick with something newer. |
52 |
> |
53 |
> So, if you want to be bleeding-edge then stick with the bleeding edge |
54 |
> and run the latest stable. If you want something longterm I'd stick |
55 |
> with the 1st-2nd most recent longterm. 4.1 is still pretty new, but |
56 |
> I'm close to switching over to it. |
57 |
> |
58 |
> You'd need to post the details of the panic to know more - the btrfs |
59 |
> list is probably the best place. But again I'd confirm the panic on |
60 |
> the latest release in the series you're running so as to not waste |
61 |
> time on issues that may already be fixed. |
62 |
|
63 |
|
64 |
Thanks much -- 4.2.1 wqas what I just got using gentoo-sources, I will |
65 |
sync and try again, maybe go to 4.1 and see what happens. I heard 3.19 |
66 |
was the first version where btrfs actually worked, and I have 3.18 here, |
67 |
this is why I was trying the newer kernel. So, what is the latest lts |
68 |
kernel these days anyway? |
69 |
|
70 |
Thanks again. |
71 |
|
72 |
-- |
73 |
Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: |
74 |
How do |
75 |
you spend it? |
76 |
|
77 |
John Covici |
78 |
covici@××××××××××.com |