cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
2917
Views
5
Helpful
9
Replies

SYS-3-CPUHOG = SAUtilReport

Hi peeps,

 

We're seeing this CPUHOG after a system reboot and wanted to ask if anyone know if I should contact TAC or if there are any other solutions? Anyone knows what this SAUtilReport does?

 

System:
Model: C9200-24P

FW version: 17.03.03

 

Reboot reason might be interesting:

System returned to ROM by Critical process linux_iosd_image fault on rp_0_0 (rc=139) at 12:22:18 UTC Mon Aug 23 2021
System image file is "flash:cat9k_lite_iosxe.17.03.03.SPA.bin"
Last reload reason: Critical process linux_iosd_image fault on rp_0_0 (rc=139)

 

There is a crash log, but it's quite big, so not sure if it makes sense to upload here.

 

BR

Claus

1 Accepted Solution

Accepted Solutions

Fixed it by following this workaround, in CSCvv72609 :
#license smart factory reset
#reload

Other processes which were affected:
SAGetRUMIds
SAUtilRepSave

View solution in original post

9 Replies 9

balaji.bandi
VIP Guru VIP Guru
VIP Guru

if this is imacting, raise an TAC case, if not try difference version like 17.3.4 or above ?

 

BB

***** Rate All Helpful Responses *****

How to Ask The Cisco Community for Help

Leo Laohoo
VIP Community Legend VIP Community Legend
VIP Community Legend

@Claus Juhl Pedersen wrote:

Last reload reason: Critical process linux_iosd_image fault on rp_0_0 (rc=139)


Raise a TAC Case and get them to confirm if this is CSCvq78529. 

WARNING:  Make sure to raise a TAC Case during the hours of operation of Europe or RTP/South America time.  

you know how much it costs to raise a tac case? is it worth it just to let them confirm it may be hits some bug and get their valuable advise to upgrade the ios? 

Leo Laohoo
VIP Community Legend VIP Community Legend
VIP Community Legend

@tommar wrote:

you know how much it costs to raise a tac case? is it worth it just to let them confirm it may be hits some bug and get their valuable advise to upgrade the ios? 


IOS-XE, aka Polaris, is buggy and leaks like a sieve.  

I have seen and heard of old platforms such as 6000/6500 in the core with uptimes of >5 years without any issues.  But for Polaris, the only way, that I can think of (and based on experience), to minimize the chances of crashes is to schedule regular reboot.  For 3650/3850, it would be once every 3 months.  If the switches are on 16.12.X, then every four weeks.  For the Catalyst 9k switches, once every 9 to 12 months.  

I have been exposed to Cisco OS since 2005 and I have never had so many TAC cases created since the introduction of IOS-XE.  It is laughably easy to find bugs with no experience necessary.  

And a lot of the bugs we have found are "0-config":  Take a switch, router or 9800 out of the box, load the firmware and *bang*, bug is triggered.  

Fixed it by following this workaround, in CSCvv72609 :
#license smart factory reset
#reload

Other processes which were affected:
SAGetRUMIds
SAUtilRepSave

jmcgrady1
Beginner
Beginner

Cisco's software is getting steadily worse. Reading CSCvv72609; the workaround, which will clear the backlog, requires that the smart licensing be wiped - which could trigger a crash! And even if it works, the switch must be restarted,

Honestly, they don't have a graceful way of restarting an errant process?

Leo Laohoo
VIP Community Legend VIP Community Legend
VIP Community Legend

@jmcgrady1 wrote:

Cisco's software is getting steadily worse.


It has been and it will only get worst moving on.  

There is really no need to get a switch, with multi-CPU, SD-WAN or SD-Access, if it is will only be doing simple Layer 2 packet shuffling.  

Leo what is a good choice for a switch?  My needs are layer 2 switching (1000mb/s), 4 SFP (10gb capable is a bonus), PoE, trunking. Stacking is a bonus - if the stack can reboot each member 1 at a time for things like firmware update. For some switches, i need layer 3 capability: EIGRP, QoS.

Leo Laohoo
VIP Community Legend VIP Community Legend
VIP Community Legend

@jmcgrady1 wrote:

My needs are layer 2 switching (1000mb/s), 4 SFP (10gb capable is a bonus), PoE, trunking. Stacking is a bonus - if the stack can reboot each member 1 at a time for things like firmware update. 


Layer 2, 802.1q trunking, stacking ... Nothing wrong with Catalyst 1000.  

At the very least Catalyst 1000 does not support Cisco "Smart" (uh-huh, suuuuuure) License.

QoS in a network is redundant.  QoS on the WAN-facing port is a wasted effort.  

Getting Started

Find answers to your questions by entering keywords or phrases in the Search bar above. New here? Use these resources to familiarize yourself with the community:

Recognize Your Peers