(In reply to Trevor Cordes from comment #488)
> Sorry the pic is so horrible in attachment 280661 [details], but at least
> you can see most of the stack traces. I have a wider pic of it I can use to
> transcribe the missing right-hand-side bits if needed.
Thanks, that's good enough.
Btw, is there any particular reason why you're running a 32-bit kernel?
If not, I'd consider switching to a 64-bit kernel which is a lot more
and widely tested.
> By "idle: typical" bios tweak I meant the <<selecting "Typical current
> idle">> tweak everyone else has done.
I need to figure out what's behind that setting. What kind of BIOS do
you have?
dmesg | grep DMI:
should have it.
> As for which fix (1 or 2) really fixed it, I'll get back to you in about a
> month because this box is now in production and we can't afford downtime
> until our next scheduled period. I have a feeling just the bios tweak is
> required (from all I've read in dozens of forums), but I did both for good
> measure.
(In reply to Trevor Cordes from comment #488)
> Sorry the pic is so horrible in attachment 280661 [details], but at least
> you can see most of the stack traces. I have a wider pic of it I can use to
> transcribe the missing right-hand-side bits if needed.
Thanks, that's good enough.
Btw, is there any particular reason why you're running a 32-bit kernel?
If not, I'd consider switching to a 64-bit kernel which is a lot more
and widely tested.
> By "idle: typical" bios tweak I meant the <<selecting "Typical current
> idle">> tweak everyone else has done.
I need to figure out what's behind that setting. What kind of BIOS do
you have?
dmesg | grep DMI:
should have it.
> As for which fix (1 or 2) really fixed it, I'll get back to you in about a
> month because this box is now in production and we can't afford downtime
> until our next scheduled period. I have a feeling just the bios tweak is
> required (from all I've read in dozens of forums), but I did both for good
> measure.
Ok, whenever you can.
Thx.