FC4 crashes repeatedly on Supermicro AS1020A-T dual-core Opterons, SMP
Hi all,
I have recently purchased three Supermicro AS1020A-T servers equipped with two dual-core Opterons 280 each. H8DAR-T motherboards, 8 or 12 GB RAM. The systems carry FC4 x86_64 with proprietary driver (made by Adaptec) for the onboard Marvell 88SX6041 SATA Controller. Original (install) kernel 2.6.11-1.1369_FC4smp - unfortunately not upgradable due to the lack of the SATA driver for other kernel versions.
All systems crash (either hang with some "machine check exception" kernel messages or reset) when loaded with repeating runs of 1.3gb, CPU intensive with some I/O. I run 2 or 4 jobs simultaneously and they had never survived more than a few hours.
Suspecting it may be the SATA driver problem I mounted /tmp as "tmpfs" and repeated the tests entirely in /tmp (with plenty of RAM this means (IMHO) doing I/O in memory). No success.
It is somewhat better when I run similar size no-I/O jobs but these also crash, although less frequently.
I tried to install i386 version, also crashes. Same (or even worse) with FC3.
Memtest does not show any RAM errors.
Finally I did two tests which seem to have excluded SATA controller/driver as the reason for crashes:
1. I installed an additional IDE hard disk and put FC4/x86_64 system on it (without the Adaptec driver, so the system does not even see the SATA disks), updated the kernel to the latest (2.6.16) - also crashed.
2. I ran non-SMP 2.6.11 kernel (with Adaptec driver) on another machine. There have been two test repeating 1.3g jobs running on it (each getting 50% of the single CPU used by the system) for over 50 hours now, no crashes. Also, a single test job running on SMP kernel gave no crashes in 24 hours.
It seems there is a problem with SMP kernel and dual-core Opterons, at least on this hardware. I am stuck with three top-level machines which can work only at 25% of nominal cpu power. Any hints would be appreciated.
regards, Michal.
Signature · 2 lines
Michal Szymanski (msz at astrouw dot edu dot pl) Warsaw University Observatory, Warszawa, POLAND
Quoted 38 lines · Michal Szymanski
Hi all,
I have recently purchased three Supermicro AS1020A-T servers equipped with two dual-core Opterons 280 each. H8DAR-T motherboards, 8 or 12 GB RAM. The systems carry FC4
x86_64with proprietary driver (made by Adaptec) for the onboard Marvell 88SX6041 SATA Controller. Original (install) kernel 2.6.11-1.1369_FC4smp - unfortunately not upgradable due to the lack of the SATA driver for other kernel versions.All systems crash (either hang with some "machine check exception" kernel messages or reset) when loaded with repeating runs of 1.3gb, CPU intensive with some I/O. I run 2 or 4 jobs simultaneously and they had never survived more than a few hours.
Suspecting it may be the SATA driver problem I mounted /tmp as "tmpfs" and repeated the tests entirely in /tmp (with plenty of RAM this means (IMHO) doing I/O in memory). No success.
It is somewhat better when I run similar size no-I/O jobs but these also crash, although less frequently.
I tried to install i386 version, also crashes. Same (or even worse) with FC3.
Memtest does not show any RAM errors.
Finally I did two tests which seem to have excluded SATA controller/driver as the reason for crashes:
1. I installed an additional IDE hard disk and put FC4/x86_64 system on it (without the Adaptec driver, so the system does not even see the SATA disks), updated the kernel to the latest (2.6.16) - also crashed.
2. I ran non-SMP 2.6.11 kernel (with Adaptec driver) on another machine. There have been two test repeating 1.3g jobs running on it (each getting 50% of the single CPU used by the system) for over 50 hours now, no crashes. Also, a single test job running on SMP kernel gave no crashes in 24 hours.
Quoted 7 lines
It seems there is a problem with SMP kernel and dual-core Opterons, at least on this hardware. I am stuck with three top-level machines which can work only at 25% of nominal cpu power. Any hints would be appreciated.
What happens if you use only one CPU? Either with a uni kernel (you should have gotten one) or "maxcpus=1" in the boot commands. You are running a custom kernel with custom drivers, so you really should be asking the supplier, all we can do is suggest things which might provide extra information.
Signature · 3 lines
bill davidsen <[email protected]> CTO TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979
One note. I am running on a quad 875 system, but am using Suse rather than FC4. It is running perfectly reliable (this is a 4 cpu, dual-core, 2.2ghz box, 8 processors total). I had problems with FC4 myself, although it runs perfectly on my normal dual xeon boxes...
Robert M. Hyatt, Ph.D. Computer and Information Sciences [email protected] University of Alabama at Birmingham (205) 934-2213 136A Campbell Hall (205) 934-5473 FAX Birmingham, AL 35294-1170
Quoted 56 lines · Bill Davidsen
Quoted 36 lines · Michal Szymanski
Hi all,
I have recently purchased three Supermicro AS1020A-T servers equipped with two dual-core Opterons 280 each. H8DAR-T motherboards, 8 or 12 GB RAM. The systems carry FC4
x86_64with proprietary driver (made by Adaptec) for the onboard Marvell 88SX6041 SATA Controller. Original (install) kernel 2.6.11-1.1369_FC4smp - unfortunately not upgradable due to the lack of the SATA driver for other kernel versions.All systems crash (either hang with some "machine check exception" kernel messages or reset) when loaded with repeating runs of 1.3gb, CPU intensive with some I/O. I run 2 or 4 jobs simultaneously and they had never survived more than a few hours.
Suspecting it may be the SATA driver problem I mounted /tmp as "tmpfs" and repeated the tests entirely in /tmp (with plenty of RAM this means (IMHO) doing I/O in memory). No success.
It is somewhat better when I run similar size no-I/O jobs but these also crash, although less frequently.
I tried to install i386 version, also crashes. Same (or even worse) with FC3.
Memtest does not show any RAM errors. Finally I did two tests which seem to have excluded SATA controller/driver as the reason for crashes:
1. I installed an additional IDE hard disk and put FC4/x86_64 system on it (without the Adaptec driver, so the system does not even see the SATA disks), updated the kernel to the latest (2.6.16) - also crashed.
2. I ran non-SMP 2.6.11 kernel (with Adaptec driver) on another machine. There have been two test repeating 1.3g jobs running on it (each getting 50% of the single CPU used by the system) for over 50 hours now, no crashes. Also, a single test job running on SMP kernel gave no crashes in 24 hours.
Quoted 6 lines
It seems there is a problem with SMP kernel and dual-core Opterons, at least on this hardware. I am stuck with three top-level machines which can work only at 25% of nominal cpu power. Any hints would be appreciated.
What happens if you use only one CPU? Either with a uni kernel (you should have gotten one) or "maxcpus=1" in the boot commands. You are running a custom kernel with custom drivers, so you really should be asking the supplier, all we can do is suggest things which might provide extra information.
Signature · 8 lines
bill davidsen <[email protected]> CTO TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-smp" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hi Robert:
That might be because SuSE's compiled kernel doesn't use mce. If you can look in the .config for the compiled kernel (or you can ask one of the maintainers for SuSE...or you're fortunate enough to have a /proc/config), I'd be curious if it has MCE enabled (you'd be looking for "CONFIG_X86_MCE=y"). That would nicely explain the discrepancy. 8)
-Phil/CERisE
Quoted 80 lines · Robert M. Hyatt
One note. I am running on a quad 875 system, but am using Suse rather than FC4. It is running perfectly reliable (this is a 4 cpu, dual-core, 2.2ghz box, 8 processors total). I had problems with FC4 myself, although it runs perfectly on my normal dual xeon boxes...
Robert M. Hyatt, Ph.D. Computer and Information Sciences [email protected] University of Alabama at Birmingham (205) 934-2213 136A Campbell Hall (205) 934-5473 FAX Birmingham, AL 35294-1170Quoted 46 lines · Bill Davidsen
Quoted 38 lines · Michal Szymanski
Hi all,
I have recently purchased three Supermicro AS1020A-T servers equipped with two dual-core Opterons 280 each. H8DAR-T motherboards, 8 or 12 GB RAM. The systems carry FC4
x86_64with proprietary driver (made by Adaptec) for the onboard Marvell 88SX6041 SATA Controller. Original (install) kernel 2.6.11-1.1369_FC4smp - unfortunately not upgradable due to the lack of the SATA driver for other kernel versions.All systems crash (either hang with some "machine check exception" kernel messages or reset) when loaded with repeating runs of 1.3gb, CPU intensive with some I/O. I run 2 or 4 jobs simultaneously and they had never survived more than a few hours.
Suspecting it may be the SATA driver problem I mounted /tmp as "tmpfs" and repeated the tests entirely in /tmp (with plenty of RAM this means (IMHO) doing I/O in memory). No success.
It is somewhat better when I run similar size no-I/O jobs but these also crash, although less frequently.
I tried to install i386 version, also crashes. Same (or even worse) with FC3.
Memtest does not show any RAM errors.
Finally I did two tests which seem to have excluded SATA controller/driver as the reason for crashes:1. I installed an additional IDE hard disk and put FC4/x86_64 system on it (without the Adaptec driver, so the system does not even see the SATA disks), updated the kernel to the latest (2.6.16) - also crashed.
2. I ran non-SMP 2.6.11 kernel (with Adaptec driver) on another machine. There have been two test repeating 1.3g jobs running on it (each getting 50%
of the single CPU used by the system) for over 50 hours now, no crashes. Also, a single test job running on SMP kernel gave no crashes in 24 hours.Quoted 6 lines
It seems there is a problem with SMP kernel and dual-core Opterons, at least on this hardware. I am stuck with three top-level machines which can work only at 25% of nominal cpu power. Any hints would be appreciated.
Quoted 16 lines
What happens if you use only one CPU? Either with a uni kernel (you should have gotten one) or "maxcpus=1" in the boot commands. You are running a custom kernel with custom drivers, so you really should be asking the supplier, all we can do is suggest things which might provide extra information.
Signature · 8 lines
bill davidsen <[email protected]> CTO TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-smp" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-smp" in the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Sorry, not much help here. I've been running redhat forever and have built a zillion kernels. But for Suse, which I am using out at the AMD development center, I don't know a thing about where they put config info. There is no /proc/config, so that's out. I could not find any config file in the places I would look in my redhat systems.
This is Suse 10.0. If you can tell me where to look, I'll be happy to peek and report back...
Robert M. Hyatt, Ph.D. Computer and Information Sciences [email protected] University of Alabama at Birmingham (205) 934-2213 136A Campbell Hall (205) 934-5473 FAX Birmingham, AL 35294-1170
Quoted 96 lines · On Fri, 5 May 2006, [email protected] wrote:
Hi Robert:
That might be because SuSE's compiled kernel doesn't use mce. If you can look in the .config for the compiled kernel (or you can ask one of the maintainers for SuSE...or you're fortunate enough to have a
/proc/config), I'd be curious if it has MCE enabled (you'd be looking for "CONFIG_X86_MCE=y"). That would nicely explain the discrepancy. 8)-Phil/CERisE
Quoted 76 lines · Robert M. Hyatt
One note. I am running on a quad 875 system, but am using Suse rather than FC4. It is running perfectly reliable (this is a 4 cpu, dual-core, 2.2ghz box, 8 processors total). I had problems with FC4 myself, although it runs perfectly on my normal dual xeon boxes...
Robert M. Hyatt, Ph.D. Computer and Information Sciences [email protected] University of Alabama at Birmingham (205) 934-2213 136A Campbell Hall (205) 934-5473 FAX Birmingham, AL 35294-1170Quoted 57 lines · Bill Davidsen
Quoted 38 lines · Michal Szymanski
Hi all,
I have recently purchased three Supermicro AS1020A-T servers equipped with two dual-core Opterons 280 each. H8DAR-T motherboards, 8 or 12 GB RAM. The systems carry FC4
x86_64with proprietary driver (made by Adaptec) for the onboard Marvell 88SX6041 SATA Controller. Original (install) kernel 2.6.11-1.1369_FC4smp - unfortunately not upgradable due to the lack of the SATA driver for other kernel versions.All systems crash (either hang with some "machine check exception" kernel messages or reset) when loaded with repeating runs of 1.3gb, CPU intensive with some I/O. I run 2 or 4 jobs simultaneously and they had never survived more than a few hours.
Suspecting it may be the SATA driver problem I mounted /tmp as "tmpfs" and repeated the tests entirely in /tmp (with plenty of RAM this means (IMHO) doing I/O in memory). No success.
It is somewhat better when I run similar size no-I/O jobs but these also crash, although less frequently.
I tried to install i386 version, also crashes. Same (or even worse) with FC3.
Memtest does not show any RAM errors.
Finally I did two tests which seem to have excluded SATA controller/driver as the reason for crashes:1. I installed an additional IDE hard disk and put FC4/x86_64 system on it (without the Adaptec driver, so the system does not even see the SATA disks), updated the kernel to the latest (2.6.16) - also crashed.
2. I ran non-SMP 2.6.11 kernel (with Adaptec driver) on another machine. There have been two test repeating 1.3g jobs running on it (each getting 50%
of the single CPU used by the system) for over 50 hours now, no crashes. Also, a single test job running on SMP kernel gave no crashes in 24 hours.Quoted 6 lines
It seems there is a problem with SMP kernel and dual-core Opterons, at least on this hardware. I am stuck with three top-level machines which can work only at 25% of nominal cpu power. Any hints would be appreciated.
What happens if you use only one CPU? Either with a uni kernel (you should have gotten one) or "maxcpus=1" in the boot commands. You are running a custom kernel with custom drivers, so you really should be asking the supplier, all we can do is suggest things which might provide extra information.
--
bill davidsen <[email protected]>
CTO TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979Quoted 5 lines
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-smp" in the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.htmlQuoted 4 lines
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-smp" in the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-smp" in the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Quoted 35 lines · Robert M. Hyatt
One note. I am running on a quad 875 system, but am using Suse rather than FC4. It is running perfectly reliable (this is a 4 cpu, dual-core, 2.2ghz box, 8 processors total). I had problems with FC4 myself, although it runs perfectly on my normal dual xeon boxes...
Quoted 27 lines · Bill Davidsen
Quoted 9 lines · Michal Szymanski
Hi all,
I have recently purchased three Supermicro AS1020A-T servers equipped with two dual-core Opterons 280 each. H8DAR-T motherboards, 8 or 12 GB RAM. The systems carry FC4
x86_64with proprietary driver (made by Adaptec) for the onboard Marvell 88SX6041 SATA Controller. Original (install) kernel 2.6.11-1.1369_FC4smp - unfortunately not upgradable due to the lack of the SATA driver for other kernel versions.Quoted 11 lines
All systems crash (either hang with some "machine check exception" kernel messages or reset) when loaded with repeating runs of 1.3gb, CPU intensive with some I/O. I run 2 or 4 jobs simultaneously and they had never survived more than a few hours.
...
2. I ran non-SMP 2.6.11 kernel (with Adaptec driver) on another machine. There have been two test repeating 1.3g jobs running on it (each getting 50%
of the single CPU used by the system) for over 50 hours now, no crashes. Also, a single test job running on SMP kernel gave no crashes in 24 hours.What happens if you use only one CPU? Either with a uni kernel (you should have gotten one) or "maxcpus=1" in the boot commands. You are running a custom kernel with custom drivers, so you really should be asking the supplier, all we can do is suggest things which might provide extra information.
Hi all,
I got 3 copies of Roberts' message but none of Bill's :-)
Still, I don't quite understand Bill's question ("What happens if you use only one CPU?"). The answer is quoted just above this question! There were no crashes with the system running on non-SMP kernel.
In the meantime I got Kingston 1GB modules from my dealer, for testing. Strangely as it seems, I could not crash the machine with Kingston memory running tests as long as 72 hours. It seems, then, that it is a memory issue although I do not understand why the same memory crashes the machine in SMP and does not in non-SMP, under similar load. Also, the Patriot 2GB memory modules (which seem to crash the machines) are on the Supermicro's list of memory recommended for H8DAR-T mobo.
One of the machines went back to the dealer (actually to their memory supplier) for tests. The memory guys seem not to trust our crashing experience. We'll see what happens. I am afraid, however, that they will say "the memory is OK".
regards, Michal.
Signature · 2 lines
Michal Szymanski (msz at astrouw dot edu dot pl) Warsaw University Observatory, Warszawa, POLAND
Quoted 38 lines · Michal Szymanski
Quoted 34 lines · Robert M. Hyatt
One note. I am running on a quad 875 system, but am using Suse rather than FC4. It is running perfectly reliable (this is a 4 cpu, dual-core, 2.2ghz box, 8 processors total). I had problems with FC4 myself, although it runs perfectly on my normal dual xeon boxes...
Quoted 28 lines · Bill Davidsen
Quoted 9 lines · Michal Szymanski
Hi all,
I have recently purchased three Supermicro AS1020A-T servers equipped with two dual-core Opterons 280 each. H8DAR-T motherboards, 8 or 12 GB RAM. The systems carry FC4
x86_64with proprietary driver (made by Adaptec) for the onboard Marvell 88SX6041 SATA Controller. Original (install) kernel 2.6.11-1.1369_FC4smp - unfortunately not upgradable due to the lack of the SATA driver for other kernel versions.Quoted 12 lines
All systems crash (either hang with some "machine check exception" kernel messages or reset) when loaded with repeating runs of 1.3gb, CPU intensive with some I/O. I run 2 or 4 jobs simultaneously and they had never survived more than a few hours.
...
2. I ran non-SMP 2.6.11 kernel (with Adaptec driver) on another machine. There have been two test repeating 1.3g jobs running on it (each getting 50% of the single CPU used by the system) for over 50 hours now, no crashes. Also, a single test job running on SMP kernel gave no crashes in 24 hours.What happens if you use only one CPU? Either with a uni kernel (you should have gotten one) or "maxcpus=1" in the boot commands. You are running a custom kernel with custom drivers, so you really should be asking the supplier, all we can do is suggest things which might provide extra information.
Quoted 9 lines
Hi all,
I got 3 copies of Roberts' message but none of Bill's :-)
Still, I don't quite understand Bill's question ("What happens if you use only one CPU?"). The answer is quoted just above this question! There were no crashes with the system running on non-SMP kernel.
It's a great answer, but not to my question. I wasn't asking what happens with a different kernel, but what happens when you run the SMP kernel and ==>use<== only one CPU by setting the max cpu to one. The uni kernel doesn't have a lot of code in an SMP kernel, so it haides a lot of possible questions.
Quoted 8 lines
In the meantime I got Kingston 1GB modules from my dealer, for testing. Strangely as it seems, I could not crash the machine with Kingston memory running tests as long as 72 hours. It seems, then, that it is a memory issue although I do not understand why the same memory crashes the machine in SMP and does not in non-SMP, under similar load. Also, the Patriot 2GB memory modules (which seem to crash the machines) are on the Supermicro's list of memory recommended for H8DAR-T mobo.
Quoted 6 lines
One of the machines went back to the dealer (actually to their memory supplier) for tests. The memory guys seem not to trust our crashing experience. We'll see what happens. I am afraid, however, that they will say "the memory is OK".
The memory may be operating within spec, the timing setup in the BIOS may be incorrect, etc, etc. Unfortunately it is possible to get a case where everything is right but it doesn't work. Depending on the BIOS capabilities, adding .05v or .1v to the memory voltage (can you do that?) might solve the problem, or I guess make it worse.
Signature · 3 lines
bill davidsen <[email protected]> CTO TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979
Quoted 44 lines · Bill Davidsen
Quoted 42 lines · Michal Szymanski
Quoted 34 lines · Robert M. Hyatt
One note. I am running on a quad 875 system, but am using Suse rather than FC4. It is running perfectly reliable (this is a 4 cpu, dual-core, 2.2ghz box, 8 processors total). I had problems with FC4 myself, although it runs perfectly on my normal dual xeon boxes...
Quoted 27 lines · Bill Davidsen
Quoted 9 lines · Michal Szymanski
Hi all,
I have recently purchased three Supermicro AS1020A-T servers equipped with two dual-core Opterons 280 each. H8DAR-T motherboards, 8 or 12 GB RAM. The systems carry FC4
x86_64with proprietary driver (made by Adaptec) for the onboard Marvell 88SX6041 SATA Controller. Original (install) kernel 2.6.11-1.1369_FC4smp - unfortunately not upgradable due to the lack of the SATA driver for other kernel versions.Quoted 11 lines
All systems crash (either hang with some "machine check exception" kernel messages or reset) when loaded with repeating runs of 1.3gb, CPU intensive with some I/O. I run 2 or 4 jobs simultaneously and they had never survived more than a few hours.
...
2. I ran non-SMP 2.6.11 kernel (with Adaptec driver) on another machine. There have been two test repeating 1.3g jobs running on it (each getting 50% of the single CPU used by the system) for over 50 hours now, no crashes. Also, a single test job running on SMP kernel gave no crashes in 24 hours.What happens if you use only one CPU? Either with a uni kernel (you should have gotten one) or "maxcpus=1" in the boot commands. You are running a custom kernel with custom drivers, so you really should be asking the supplier, all we can do is suggest things which might provide extra information.
Hi all,
I got 3 copies of Roberts' message but none of Bill's :-)
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Still, I don't quite understand Bill's question ("What happens if you use only one CPU?"). The answer is quoted just above this question! There were no crashes with the system running on non-SMP kernel.
It's a great answer, but not to my question. I wasn't asking what happens with a different kernel, but what happens when you run the SMP kernel and ==>use<== only one CPU by setting the max cpu to one. The uni kernel doesn't have a lot of code in an SMP kernel, so it haides a lot of possible questions.
s/haides/hides/
Yes, I know my original question wasn't explicit on what I was asking, it's just the first thing I would have tried because I wouldn't have that uni kernel around.
Signature · 3 lines
bill davidsen <[email protected]> CTO TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 4 lines · Michal Szymanski
All systems crash (either hang with some "machine check exception" kernel messages or reset) when loaded with repeating runs of 1.3gb, CPU intensive with some I/O. I run 2 or 4 jobs simultaneously and they had never survived more than a few hours.
Let's try the easy stuff first -- if it's crashing with a machine check exception, then let's disable machine check exceptions, and see if things still break.
Try booting with the parameter "nomce". Be aware that mce is a mechanism for the processor to inform the kernel of thermal issues or component failure. You'll only want to disable this mechanism if you aren't having thermal problems.
Of course, if you are having thermal problems, it's probably a good idea to resolve those before cranking up the other 3/4s of your system. ; )
Hope that helps!
-Phil/CERisE
P.S. I came a little late to this party -- I didn't see the original message. Did you include the text of the kernel crash?
Quoted 7 lines · On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 08:23:44AM -0700, [email protected] wrote:
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 4 lines · Michal Szymanski
All systems crash (either hang with some "machine check exception" kernel messages or reset) when loaded with repeating runs of 1.3gb, CPU intensive with some I/O. I run 2 or 4 jobs simultaneously and they had never survived more than a few hours.
Quoted 8 lines
Let's try the easy stuff first -- if it's crashing with a machine check exception, then let's disable machine check exceptions, and see if things still break.
Try booting with the parameter "nomce". Be aware that mce is a mechanism for the processor to inform the kernel of thermal issues or component failure. You'll only want to disable this mechanism if you aren't having thermal problems.
I tried "nomce". The machine does not "halt" now with MCE kernel panic messages onscreen but resets after 3-4 hours of work under 2 or more jobs.
As I wrote in a response to Robert's message, it seems to be a memory issue, as there are no crashes with Kingston 1GB memory modules. One of the machines and the memory went back to the dealer for tests.
Quoted 2 lines
P.S. I came a little late to this party -- I didn't see the original message. Did you include the text of the kernel crash?
Below the kernel message as OCR-ed from a screen digital photo :) Plus the decoded message as adviced by the first message:
Fedora Core release 4 (Stentz)
kernel 2.6.16-1.2069_FC4smp on an x86_64
red10 login:
HARDWARE ERROR
CPU 0: Machine Check Exception: 4 Bank 4: f604a00200000813
TSC 1504205a42ba ADDR 115e47828
This is not a software problem!
Run through mcelog --ascii to decode and contact your hardware vendor
Kernel panic - not syncing: Machine check
Call Trace: <#MC>
<ffffffff80134e6a>{panic+133} (ffffffff801129eb){mcheck_timer+0}
<ffffffff801131fc>{do_machine_check+753}
<ffffffff8010be43>{machine_check+127} <EOE>------------------
mcelog --ascii output:
HARDWARE ERROR
CPU 0 BANK 4 TSC 1504205a42ba
MCG status:MCIP
MCi status:
Error overflow
Uncorrected error
Error enabledMCi_ADDR register valid
Processor context corrupt
MCA:BUS Generic Originated-request Read Memory-access Request-timeout Error Model:
STATUS f604a00200000813 MCGSTATUS 4
------------------
regards, Michal.
Signature · 2 lines
Michal Szymanski (msz at astrouw dot edu dot pl) Warsaw University Observatory, Warszawa, POLAND