lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 22:37:44 -0800 (PST) From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> To: mingo@...e.hu Cc: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: BUG in 2.6.20-rt8 From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 07:27:47 +0100 > > * Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > > I got the following running stock 2.6.20-rt8 on an 4-CPU 1.8GHz > > Opteron box. The machine continued to run a few rounds of kernbench > > and LTP. Looks a bit scary -- a tasklet was "stolen" from > > __tasklet_action(). > > > > Thoughts? In the meantime, kicking it off again to see if it repeats. > > > BUG: at kernel/softirq.c:559 __tasklet_action() > > this seems to happen very sporadically. Seems to happen more likely on > hyperthreading CPUs. It is very likely caused by the > redesign-tasklet-locking-to-be-sane patch below - which is a quick hack > of mine from early -rt days. Can you see any obvious bug in it? The > cmpxchg logic is certainly a bit ... tricky, locking-wise. Ingo, please don't use cmpxchg() in generic code, we support several processors that simply cannot do it. Instead of saying "it's just something special in -rt for now", take it out now so that what you do eventually push upstream does get tested. Thanks. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists