Hi,<br> kexec-tools version 2.0.1 works well on my machine. thanks very much.<br>kernel version still 2.6.28.10. :)<br> but under in the file kexec-tools-2.0.1/News, i dont see any changes. I'm interested in it , where can i find this info ? thanks<br>
<br>jencce<br> <br><div class="gmail_quote">2010/6/10 Simon Horman <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:horms@verge.net.au">horms@verge.net.au</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div><div></div><div class="h5">On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 02:33:14PM +0800, ÖÜÐÛ wrote:<br>
> hello everyone,<br>
> sorry to bother you. I have a problem with kexec tools. when i<br>
> use it on a ia64 machine, it does't work.<br>
> situation 1 : after executing "kexec -l ***" and "kexec -e" ,<br>
> many "cpu # is now offline" printed out, then the system lose response.<br>
> situation 2 (mostly): after many "cpu # is now offline" printed<br>
> out, some warn info printed out , and then a call trace.. system lose<br>
> response... warn info is : Unexpected irq vector 0x44 on cpu 11! .. ..<br>
> call trace has info like : fixup_irqs , take_cpu_down, etc..<br>
> Is there something wrong with my current kernel ? but it is an<br>
> usual 2.6.28.10. Does kexec support IA64 fully?<br>
> Thanks alot. bow. :)<br>
<br>
</div></div>Hi,<br>
<br>
2.6.28 should be new enough, but is it possible to check<br>
using a more recent kernel (e.g. 2.6.34) and the latest kexec-tools<br>
(2.0.1)?<br>
<br>
If the problem persists, then a copy of the stack trace would be useful.<br>
I usually collect these by using a serial console.<br>
<br>
Thanks.<br>
</blockquote></div><br>