linux-kernel - Re: Why kmem_cache_free occupy CPU for more than 10 seconds?

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 11 Apr 2007 09:44:34 -0700
From:	Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@...il.com>
To:	Zhao Forrest <forrest.zhao@...il.com>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, Paul Jackson <pj@....com>,
	penberg@...helsinki.fi, linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Why kmem_cache_free occupy CPU for more than 10 seconds?

On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 18:10 +0800, Zhao Forrest wrote:
> On 4/11/07, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 02:53 -0700, Paul Jackson wrote:
> > > I'm confused - which end of ths stack is up?
> > >
> > > cpuset_exit doesn't call do_exit, rather it's the other
> > > way around.  But put_files_struct doesn't call do_exit,
> > > rather do_exit calls __exit_files calls put_files_struct.
> >
> > I'm guessing its x86_64 which generates crap traces.
> >
> Yes, it's x86_64. Is there a reliable way to generate stack traces under x86_64?
> Can enabling "[ ] Compile the kernel with frame pointers" help?

CONFIG_UNWIND_INFO=y
CONFIG_STACK_UNWIND=y

should help.

Thanks,
Badari



-
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/