mr-hexen Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 if its only crashing when plugins are loaded this is not a RC bug but a plugin bug and needs to be brought to the proper forum. remove all plugins and test stability. once that is proven post in the other forum "user customization" or "applications". you'll find these plugins in either or both. Quote Link to comment
madburg Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 if its only crashing when plugins are loaded this is not a RC bug but a plugin bug and needs to be brought to the proper forum. remove all plugins and test stability. once that is proven post in the other forum "user customization" or "applications". you'll find these plugins in either or both. Normally I would agree BUT, if in a very prior release all was well and NOTHING changed but upgrading to the next RC, it could lean to memory management issues by the core product. Not saying this is the case above, but there are signs of memory issues in this RC based on reported posts. Quote Link to comment
drawz Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Hi - I upgraded my tower from 5rc8a to rc11 today. Couple of days ago I started having trouble with emhttp doing segmentation fault and search showed few other users have seen that issue. I was hoping this release will fix it but I have been too optimistic. Here is the problem on the new rc11 server: [*]After moving /boot/config/plugins to plugins.bak, my remote computer can load //tower main page. All the MBR settings look okay and the shares look fine, accessible through a remote Windows computer. [*]I moved my plugin folders back and restarted the machine in the hopes of starting an overnight permissions settings. Now my emhttp seems to have crashed although I do not see any indication of that in /var/log/syslog. [*]I can bring up my "simple features" (//tower:8080) web page but nothing else works - No //tower or shares visible in Windows. I can login through putty to the server. [*]My hunch is something in the plugins is causing the emttp to crash. The server's uptime was 37 days before I had to restart it. Short of disabling each plugin one by one and restarting the server, is there a way to determine what is causing this behavior? I have copied some relevant output: simpleFeatures/ simpleFeatures.active.streams-1.0.5-noarch-1.plg* simpleFeatures.activity.monitor-1.0.5-noarch-1.plg* simpleFeatures.cache.dirs-1.0.5-noarch-1.plg* simpleFeatures.core.webGUI-1.0.5-noarch-1.plg* simpleFeatures.disk.health-1.0.5-noarch-1.plg* simpleFeatures.dns.server-1.0.5-noarch-1.plg* simpleFeatures.email.notify-1.0.5-noarch-1.plg* simpleFeatures.log.viewer-1.0.5-noarch-1.plg* simpleFeatures.s3.sleep-1.0.5-noarch-1.plg* simpleFeatures.system.info-1.0.5-noarch-1.plg* simpleFeatures.system.stats-1.0.5-noarch-1.plg* simpleFeatures.web.server-1.0.5-noarch-1.plg* Update to SimpleFeatures 1.0.11, which I think is required for rc11. Quote Link to comment
mr-hexen Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Parcheck completed without error or slowdown. Finished in the same amount of time. Quote Link to comment
Just Me Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 Hey! I noticed some error in the syslog and since I have no idea what they mean I'll post the syslog. Mar 3 16:58:23 NAS kernel: INFO: rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU { 1} (t=6000 jiffies) Mar 3 16:58:23 NAS kernel: Pid: 1659, comm: unraidd Not tainted 3.4.26-unRAID #2 (Errors) Mar 3 16:58:23 NAS kernel: Call Trace: (Errors) Mar 3 16:58:23 NAS kernel: [<c1057bca>] print_cpu_stall+0x6d/0xe5 (Errors) Mar 3 16:58:23 NAS kernel: [<c1057c7d>] __rcu_pending+0x3b/0x138 (Errors) Mar 3 16:58:23 NAS kernel: [<c1057df0>] rcu_check_callbacks+0x76/0xa1 (Errors) Mar 3 16:58:23 NAS kernel: [<c102c982>] update_process_times+0x2d/0x58 (Errors) Mar 3 16:58:23 NAS kernel: [<c104b11b>] tick_periodic+0x63/0x65 (Errors) Mar 3 16:58:23 NAS kernel: [<c104b136>] tick_handle_periodic+0x19/0x6f (Errors) Mar 3 16:58:23 NAS kernel: [<c10180d0>] smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x6d/0x7f (Errors) Mar 3 16:58:23 NAS kernel: [<f86348cc>] ? xor_blocks+0x74/0x7c [xor] (Errors) Mar 3 16:58:23 NAS kernel: [<c1342652>] apic_timer_interrupt+0x2a/0x30 (Errors) Mar 3 16:58:23 NAS kernel: [<c11b6699>] ? memcmp+0xe/0x25 (Errors) Mar 3 16:58:23 NAS kernel: [<f86a6902>] handle_stripe+0xb54/0xdc1 [md_mod] (Errors) Mar 3 16:58:23 NAS kernel: [<c102849a>] ? irq_exit+0x56/0x58 (Errors) Mar 3 16:58:23 NAS kernel: [<c103d051>] ? __wake_up+0x3b/0x42 (Errors) Mar 3 16:58:23 NAS kernel: [<f86a6be7>] unraidd+0x78/0xbc [md_mod] (Errors) Mar 3 16:58:23 NAS kernel: [<f86a3b31>] md_thread+0xcc/0xe3 [md_mod] (Errors) Mar 3 16:58:23 NAS kernel: [<c10379b5>] ? wake_up_bit+0x5b/0x5b (Errors) Mar 3 16:58:23 NAS kernel: [<f86a3a65>] ? import_device+0x166/0x166 [md_mod] (Errors) Mar 3 16:58:23 NAS kernel: [<c10376bc>] kthread+0x67/0x6c (Errors) Mar 3 16:58:23 NAS kernel: [<c1037655>] ? kthread_freezable_should_stop+0x49/0x49 (Errors) Mar 3 16:58:23 NAS kernel: [<c1342fb6>] kernel_thread_helper+0x6/0xd (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: INFO: rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU { 1} (t=6000 jiffies) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: Pid: 1659, comm: unraidd Not tainted 3.4.26-unRAID #2 (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: Call Trace: (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<c1057bca>] print_cpu_stall+0x6d/0xe5 (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<c1057c7d>] __rcu_pending+0x3b/0x138 (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<c1057df0>] rcu_check_callbacks+0x76/0xa1 (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<c102c982>] update_process_times+0x2d/0x58 (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<c104b11b>] tick_periodic+0x63/0x65 (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<c104b136>] tick_handle_periodic+0x19/0x6f (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<c10285c2>] ? irq_enter+0x41/0x41 (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<c10180d0>] smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x6d/0x7f (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<c1342652>] apic_timer_interrupt+0x2a/0x30 (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<c10285c2>] ? irq_enter+0x41/0x41 (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<c10285fe>] ? __do_softirq+0x3c/0xfa (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<c10285c2>] ? irq_enter+0x41/0x41 (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: <IRQ> [<c1028476>] ? irq_exit+0x32/0x58 Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<c1003713>] ? do_IRQ+0x87/0x9b (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<c1040206>] ? default_wake_function+0xb/0xd (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<c1342fa9>] ? common_interrupt+0x29/0x30 (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<c11b66a0>] ? memcmp+0x15/0x25 (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<f86a6902>] ? handle_stripe+0xb54/0xdc1 [md_mod] (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<c102849a>] ? irq_exit+0x56/0x58 (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<c103d051>] ? __wake_up+0x3b/0x42 (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<f86a6be7>] ? unraidd+0x78/0xbc [md_mod] (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<f86a3b31>] ? md_thread+0xcc/0xe3 [md_mod] (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<c10379b5>] ? wake_up_bit+0x5b/0x5b (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<f86a3a65>] ? import_device+0x166/0x166 [md_mod] (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<c10376bc>] ? kthread+0x67/0x6c (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<c1037655>] ? kthread_freezable_should_stop+0x49/0x49 (Errors) Mar 3 17:11:01 NAS kernel: [<c1342fb6>] ? kernel_thread_helper+0x6/0xd (Errors) Mar 3 17:21:04 NAS kernel: INFO: rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU { 1} (t=6000 jiffies) Mar 3 17:21:04 NAS kernel: Pid: 1659, comm: unraidd Not tainted 3.4.26-unRAID #2 (Errors) Mar 3 17:21:04 NAS kernel: Call Trace: (Errors) Mar 3 17:21:04 NAS kernel: [<c1057bca>] print_cpu_stall+0x6d/0xe5 (Errors) Mar 3 17:21:04 NAS kernel: [<c1057c7d>] __rcu_pending+0x3b/0x138 (Errors) Mar 3 17:21:04 NAS kernel: [<c1057df0>] rcu_check_callbacks+0x76/0xa1 (Errors) Mar 3 17:21:04 NAS kernel: [<c102c982>] update_process_times+0x2d/0x58 (Errors) Mar 3 17:21:04 NAS kernel: [<c104b11b>] tick_periodic+0x63/0x65 (Errors) Mar 3 17:21:04 NAS kernel: [<c104b136>] tick_handle_periodic+0x19/0x6f (Errors) Mar 3 17:21:04 NAS kernel: [<c10180d0>] smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x6d/0x7f (Errors) Mar 3 17:21:04 NAS kernel: [<f86348cc>] ? xor_blocks+0x74/0x7c [xor] (Errors) Mar 3 17:21:04 NAS kernel: [<c1342652>] apic_timer_interrupt+0x2a/0x30 (Errors) Mar 3 17:21:04 NAS kernel: [<c11b669d>] ? memcmp+0x12/0x25 (Errors) Mar 3 17:21:04 NAS kernel: [<f86a6902>] handle_stripe+0xb54/0xdc1 [md_mod] (Errors) Mar 3 17:21:04 NAS kernel: [<c102849a>] ? irq_exit+0x56/0x58 (Errors) Mar 3 17:21:04 NAS kernel: [<c1003713>] ? do_IRQ+0x87/0x9b (Errors) Mar 3 17:21:04 NAS kernel: [<f86a6be7>] unraidd+0x78/0xbc [md_mod] (Errors) Mar 3 17:21:04 NAS kernel: [<f86a3b31>] md_thread+0xcc/0xe3 [md_mod] (Errors) Mar 3 17:21:04 NAS kernel: [<c10379b5>] ? wake_up_bit+0x5b/0x5b (Errors) Mar 3 17:21:04 NAS kernel: [<f86a3a65>] ? import_device+0x166/0x166 [md_mod] (Errors) Mar 3 17:21:04 NAS kernel: [<c10376bc>] kthread+0x67/0x6c (Errors) Mar 3 17:21:04 NAS kernel: [<c1037655>] ? kthread_freezable_should_stop+0x49/0x49 (Errors) Mar 3 17:21:04 NAS kernel: [<c1342fb6>] kernel_thread_helper+0x6/0xd (Errors) syslog-2013-03-03.txt Quote Link to comment
mbryanr Posted March 3, 2013 Share Posted March 3, 2013 That's a "harmless" warning message. I need to do some work in the unraid driver to get rid of it, which I'll do when I'm integrating with the 64-bit kernel. Quote Link to comment
hwilker Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 I hate to post regarding something so simple, but I am not able to download 5.0 rc11. I click on the Download link on the first post in this thread and I get a 404 file not found message. Just for grins, I tried the same thing for 4.7 package and got the same 404 results. Are these files moved somewhere else or are they just down at the moment? Quote Link to comment
mbryanr Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 I hate to post regarding something so simple, but I am not able to download 5.0 rc11. I click on the Download link on the first post in this thread and I get a 404 file not found message. Just for grins, I tried the same thing for 4.7 package and got the same 404 results. Are these files moved somewhere else or are they just down at the moment? I just tried the link as well. No go. This works though: http://download.lime-technology.com/download/ Quote Link to comment
hwilker Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 Thanks! Just to be certain, I see rc11 and rc11a. This is my first attempt at upgrading to v 5.x. I presume 11a is some kind of interim release to correct a specific problem and the standard "current" version I should us is rc11. Correct? Thanks again. Quote Link to comment
mbryanr Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 Correct. 11a was an interim release to test specific errors for a couple users. Changes from 5.0-rc11 to 5.0-rc11a ---------------------------------- - shfs: return correct extended attribute value length - webGui: for 'FTP user(s)', permit multiple usernames separated by spaces Changes from 5.0-rc10 to 5.0-rc11 --------------------------------- - emhttp: fixed spurious "title not found" log entries - emhttp: ensure new parity disk for 'swap disable' has a valid partition table - emhttp: fixed worker thread (format/clear/copy) inconsistent progress - emhttp: default timeZone "America/Los_Angeles" (eliminate first-boot error message) - flash boot: add menu item to boot kernel limiting memory use to 4GB - linux: use kernel 3.4.26 (for various disk controller and NIC driver bug fixes) - linux: added "Intel PIIX4 and compatible I2C driver" (i2c-piix4) per user request - linux: changed cpufreq drivers from modules to built-ins - shfs: fixed crash by replacing non-thread-safe readdir() with readdir_r() - shfs: use st_ino field to record object disk location - slack: add 10-sec timeout waiting for USB flash to appear as suggested by forum user Barzija - webGui: added very simple vsftp support - webGui: indexer: diplay disk location of objects Quote Link to comment
mbryanr Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 A good guide to upgrading to 5.0 from 4.7.. http://lime-technology.com/wiki/index.php/Migrating_from_unRAID_4.7_to_unRAID_5.0 and here is the thread: http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=25556.0 Quote Link to comment
hwilker Posted March 4, 2013 Share Posted March 4, 2013 Thanks. That should help a lot. I'm planning on starting tomorrow. Quote Link to comment
jaybee Posted March 6, 2013 Share Posted March 6, 2013 So are we having a 5 FINAL? This seems to have dropped off the radar somewhat. Are we still in a testing phase of the current RC11 and/or RC11a? What's happening. Again it's gone quiet. Quote Link to comment
prostuff1 Posted March 6, 2013 Share Posted March 6, 2013 So are we having a 5 FINAL? This seems to have dropped off the radar somewhat. Are we still in a testing phase of the current RC11 and/or RC11a? What's happening. Again it's gone quiet. He is working on the slow write bug Quote Link to comment
jaybee Posted March 6, 2013 Share Posted March 6, 2013 Is this the same one where initially people thought it was to do with running more than 4gb of ram? I thought only a small number of setups were affected? It's a bit of a shame that over 80% of people voted that version 5 FINAL was ready for release, and yet here we are still waiting for a bug to be fixed. I had high hopes that Tom would integrate all the minor last things together and release 5 FINAL with a note that it was compatible only for <4gb of ram setups. Quote Link to comment
prostuff1 Posted March 6, 2013 Share Posted March 6, 2013 Is this the same one where initially people thought it was to do with running more than 4gb of ram? I thought only a small number of setups were affected? It's a bit of a shame that over 80% of people voted that version 5 FINAL was ready for release, and yet here we are still waiting for a bug to be fixed. I had high hopes that Tom would integrate all the minor last things together and release 5 FINAL with a note that it was compatible only for <4gb of ram setups. What it really comes down to is that Tom does not really want to release something that is "defective", even for a small portion of the user base. Quote Link to comment
cj0r Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 If you voted the current version was ready for release, then just use it already. What difference is a FINAL label going to make to you? Quote Link to comment
Dougy Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 the difference being that once 5 is final then we can concentrate on an official plugin manager that will be officially supported. Unraid does not require more than 4gig of ram to operate correctly so there is really no need to delay things for this. Most plugins will also work well with less than 4g ram so it would not seem a priority Quote Link to comment
garycase Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 r.e. "... It's a bit of a shame that over 80% of people voted that version 5 FINAL was ready for release ..." ==> The ONLY vote that counts is Tom's ... and while I would certainly like to see a "final" v5, a far more important issue is that when it says "final" it is rock-solid stable !! Tom clearly feels there are a couple issues that need to be resolved before putting the "final" stamp on it -- and while I'm as frustrated as anyone at the L...O...N...G time since the last stable release (14 months since 4.7), I'd be far more frustrated if he declared v5 final and the upgrade hosed my system !! Quote Link to comment
p.totton Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 Genuine bug fixing of R5 is fine, but feature creep where new features are introduced as part of the package will increase the risk of new bugs and further delays. Quote Link to comment
Frank1940 Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 ... and while I would certainly like to see a "final" v5, a far more important issue is that when it says "final" it is rock-solid stable !! And you are a true optimist!!! There is no such thing are a 'rock-solid stable' piece of software that has to run on great variety of systems with entirely different hardware configurations. There will always be some hardware/software configuration that will have issues. All the harried software designer/coder can hope for is that the 'issues' affect as few people as possible. Let's say that it is stable enough that only one-out-of-a-million are affected. You would probably say that is stable enough UNLESS you are the ONE. PS--- I seem to recall reading that there are still a few outstanding issues in the 4.7 release. .. Quote Link to comment
optiman Posted March 7, 2013 Share Posted March 7, 2013 If you voted the current version was ready for release, then just use it already. What difference is a FINAL label going to make to you? +1 It's not like development will stop just because this goes final. There will be a 5.01 and so on, as it's a never ending improvement effort. Quote Link to comment
garycase Posted March 8, 2013 Share Posted March 8, 2013 Agree ... every bit of code has a few bugs. But clearly Tom thinks there are a couple of issues that he does NOT want to be in the "final" release. I completely agree that "feature creep" needs to be stopped -- fix the current issues and call it done There are a couple of known issues in 4.7 ... but they are known; can be avoided; and do not occur in normal use. Clearly there will be a few flaws in v5 as well => if, for example, there needs to be a caveat r.e. > 4GB of RAM that's fine -- it's easily avoided; but if there are significant slowdowns in disk access, that's a much more severe issue. As long as the known issues are easily avoidable I have no problem with a "final" state. But I don't want the "final" to introduce issues like those that were introduced between RC10 and RC11. Quote Link to comment
Riot Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 Last night I decided to install my brand new m1015 controller. Problem was I'm on 5b14 and failed to see any posts about the sleep bug with LSI cards and b14. Had a drive redball after trying to sleep. Put my old controller back in and I'm rebuilding the drive with it then I'm going to run reiserfsck. Can anyone verify RC11 plays nice with m1015s? I've seen posts with people saying it was fixed for RC3 and some using RC8 without issue. I also saw a post by Johnm with some redball issues with his MV8s with RC11. Just looking to get verification for RC11 specifically. Would hate to upgrade to find that it was good with RC3 through RC8 but crept back in for RC11 Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.