[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference vaxaxp::vmsnotes

Title:	VAX and Alpha VMS
Notice:	This is a new VMSnotes, please read note 2.1
Moderator:	VAXAXP::BERNARDO

Created:	Wed Jan 22 1997
Last Modified:	Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:	Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:	703
Total number of notes:	3722

220.0. "Three separate failures of images in P1 space - ACCVIO" by TAV02::ZVI_P (Here we are) Wed Feb 19 1997 09:29

Hi

 A customer problem.

 System is OpenVMS VAX 6.2.

 They have three failures of images with the same footprint all nearly
at the same time. One of them is backup and the other two are some user
applications.

Failure output is:

 Improperly handled condition, bad stack or no handler specified.

        Signal arguments              Stack contents

        Number = 00000005                00004401
        Name   = 0000000C                00000000
                 00000001                00000000
                 77FE2BF4                00000000
                 7FF40403                00000000
                 02800001                00000000
                                         00000000
                                         00000000
                                         00000000
                                         00000000

        Register dump

        R0 = 00000000  R1 = 7FFEC9BC  R2 = 00000000  R3 = 7FFECA00
        R4 = 00000000  R5 = 00000000  R6 = 00000001  R7 = 00779A00
        R8 = 000AA3E8  R9 = 000AA410  R10= 00000000  R11= 77FE2BDC
        AP = 7FFECA2C  FP = 7FFECA00  SP = 7FFEC9BC  PC = 7FF40403
        PSL= 02800001

%SYSTEM-F-NOHANDLER, no condition handler found


   This seems some code in P1 space of the process, system service or
   XQP.

   How can we solve that.

   Patches installed are:

VAXACRT07_062 
VAXACRT04_062
             
VAXCLIU02_070
VAXDDTM01_070
VAXDRIV04_070
VAXDRIV01_070
VAXF11X03_070
VAXF11X02_062

VAXINIT01_070
VAXINST01_062
VAXLIBR02_070
VAXLIBR01_062
VAXMSCP01_070
VAXMTAA02_062
VAXPHV02_062
VAXPRTS02_070

VAXPTD01_070
VAXSHAD05_062
VAXSHAD01_062
VAXSYS01_062
VAXSYS03_062
VAXSYS04_070 
VAXSYS06_070 
VAXSYSL01_070
VAXVERI01_062

CSCPAT_0245019
VAXBADB02_070
VAXCLIU03_062

VAXCLIU03_062
VAXDISM01_062
VAXLAVC01_062
VAXLOAD01_062
VAXLOGI02_070
VAXMANA02_070
VAXOPCO01_070
VAXQMAN02_070
VAXRMS01_062
VAXSYS02_062
VAXSYS05_070 
VAXUAF01_070

			Thanks 
			Zvi

T.R Title User Personal
Name Date Lines

220.1 I suspect this will need an IPMT XDELTA::HOFFMAN Steve, OpenVMS Engineering Wed Feb 19 1997 10:23 0

220.2 AUSS::GARSON DECcharity Program Office Wed Feb 19 1997 17:10 15

T.R	Title	User	Personal Name	Date	Lines
220.1	I suspect this will need an IPMT	XDELTA::HOFFMAN	Steve, OpenVMS Engineering	`Wed Feb 19 1997 10:23`	0
220.2		AUSS::GARSON	DECcharity Program Office	`Wed Feb 19 1997 17:10`	15
	re .0 > This seems some code in P1 space of the process, system service or > XQP. Given that the acmode is SUPER I would guess that the problem was an ACCVIO within DCL. Since you seem to love installing patches, have you got all the DCL patches? Perhaps an upgrade is in order to reduce the number of patches. Verify all images pertaining to DCL (e.g. including DCLTABLES) are identical to distribution copies (unless patched since of course). And as .1 says, unless you can quickly resolve this, it should be formally escalated. ACCVIO (presumably causing loss of process too) is pretty uncivilised and ought not go unreported or unfixed.

re .0
    
>   This seems some code in P1 space of the process, system service or
>   XQP.
    
    Given that the acmode is SUPER I would guess that the problem was an
    ACCVIO within DCL. Since you seem to love installing patches, have you
    got all the DCL patches? Perhaps an upgrade is in order to reduce the
    number of patches. Verify all images pertaining to DCL (e.g. including
    DCLTABLES) are identical to distribution copies (unless patched since of
    course).
    
    And as .1 says, unless you can quickly resolve this, it should be
    formally escalated. ACCVIO (presumably causing loss of process too) is
    pretty uncivilised and ought not go unreported or unfixed.