Bug 1112 : kernel panic on OS X with large drawing areas
Last modified: 2009-01-05 08:56




Status:
RESOLVED
Resolution:
INVALID -
Priority:
P2
Severity:
normal

 

Reporter:
nikp
Assigned To:
fry

Attachment Type Created Size Actions

Description:   Opened: 2009-01-03 21:39
System Data is at the bottom of this report.
I am getting a consistent hang of my iMac (forcing me to reboot) after
running larger screen size apps through the PDE. I am using P3D and pretty
reasonable code but larger arrays of boids (2000) and large
size(1600*2,800,P3D) screens. When the app is running (after some
minutes) it may or may not hang.

My guess is that this is some form of memory leak (smells like it), as i
have also had trouble opening photoshop after running my processing app
lots of times through the PDE.

I'll try to narrow it down and report back. I can't see any unitialised
var's and i understand that Java/Processing does it's own garbage
collection (it's weird not having to deallocate anything.

nik



Model Name: iMac
Model Identifier: iMac6,1
Processor Name: Intel Core 2 Duo
Processor Speed: 2.16 GHz
Number Of Processors: 1
Total Number Of Cores: 2
L2 Cache (per processor): 4 MB
Memory: 2 GB
Bus Speed: 667 MHz
Boot ROM Version: IM61.0093.B07
SMC Version: 1.10f2
Chipset Model: NVIDIA GeForce 7600 GT
Type: Display
Bus: PCIe
PCIe Lane Width: x16
VRAM (Total): 256 MB
Vendor: NVIDIA (0x10de)
Device ID: 0x0391
Revision ID: 0x00a1
ROM Revision: 3021
Additional Comment #1 From nikp 2009-01-03 21:51
Sorry missed OS

System Version: Mac OS X 10.4.11 (8S2167)
Kernel Version: Darwin 8.11.1

And here is the panic log's (they are always the same) (looks like some
thing graphics related)

Sat Jan 3 18:08:10 2009
panic(cpu 1 caller 0x001A49CB): Unresolved kernel trap (CPU 1, Type 14=page
fault), registers:
CR0: 0x80010033, CR2: 0x52e7338e, CR3: 0x01259000, CR4: 0x000006e0
EAX: 0x00000000, EBX: 0x04802a00, ECX: 0x00955666, EDX: 0x52e73000
CR2: 0x52e7338e, EBP: 0x25a4bc08, ESI: 0x0462b000, EDI: 0x00000000
EFL: 0x00010206, EIP: 0x0095557a, CS: 0x00000008, DS: 0x04740010

Backtrace, Format - Frame : Return Address (4 potential args on stack)
0x25a4b9b8 : 0x128d0d (0x3cc65c 0x25a4b9dc 0x131f95 0x0)
0x25a4b9f8 : 0x1a49cb (0x3d2a94 0x1 0xe 0x3d22b8)
0x25a4bb08 : 0x19b3a4 (0x25a4bb20 0x206 0x25a4bb78 0x14185d)
0x25a4bc08 : 0x95568e (0x462b000 0x0 0x0 0x0)
0x25a4bc28 : 0x951cee (0x462b000 0x0 0x1ea0c18 0x3bf3e9)
0x25a4bc78 : 0x93cc98 (0x4802a00 0x0 0x0 0x0)
0x25a4bcf8 : 0x3b19b9 (0x4802a00 0x0 0x25a4bd2c 0x25a4bd28)
0x25a4bd38 : 0x3b4e75 (0x4802a00 0x0 0x400ae60 0x1)
0x25a4bd68 : 0x189fdc (0x4802a00 0x0 0x400ae60 0x47d38c0)
0x25a4bdb8 : 0x12b4ee (0x47d388c 0x47d3da0 0x25a4bdf8 0x11e042)
0x25a4bdf8 : 0x124b17 (0x47d3800 0x3fd7550 0x47414ec 0x0)
0x25a4bf08 : 0x195f2e (0x25a4bf44 0x0 0x0 0x0)
0x25a4bfc8 : 0x19b81e (0x41983e0 0x0 0x19b22b 0x41983e0) No mapping exists
for frame pointer
Backtrace terminated-invalid frame pointer 0xbffff1d8
Kernel loadable modules in backtrace (with dependencies):
com.apple.GeForce(4.5.6)@0x926000
dependency: com.apple.iokit.IOPCIFamily(2.2)@0x5f7000
dependency: com.apple.iokit.IOGraphicsFamily(1.4.8)@0x700000
dependency: com.apple.iokit.IONDRVSupport(1.4.8)@0x71b000
dependency: com.apple.NVDAResman(4.5.6)@0x72a000

Kernel version:
Darwin Kernel Version 8.11.1: Wed Oct 10 18:23:28 PDT 2007;
root:xnu-792.25.20~1/RELEASE_I386


Additional Comment #2 From fry 2009-01-04 17:11
That's outside our control, either an Apple Java bug or a problem with
their NVIDIA driver code. There's nothing we can do from inside Java that
would cause a kernel panic, because the code doesn't go anywhere near that
low level.
Additional Comment #3 From nikp 2009-01-04 17:44
Thanks for checking and i guessed it was something odd. Just wanted to
know for sure. I'll try on one of my other mac's... It's no big deal for
now anyhow.

(In reply to comment #2)
>
>
>
> Additional Comment #2 From
>
> fry
> 2009-01-04 17:11
>
> <!--
> addReplyLink(2); //-->[reply]
>
>
>
>
> That's outside our control, either an Apple Java bug or a problem with
> their NVIDIA driver code. There's nothing we can do from inside Java that
> would cause a kernel panic, because the code doesn't go anywhere near that
> low level.
>
>

Additional Comment #4 From fry 2009-01-05 08:56
Yeah, sorry I can't be of more help but thanks for the report anyway.