linux-kernel - Re: [BUG] wireless : cpu stuck for 61s

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:	Thu, 31 Jul 2008 13:29:12 +0300
From:	"Tomas Winkler" <tomasw@...il.com>
To:	"Pekka Enberg" <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Cc:	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Dave Young" <hidave.darkstar@...il.com>,
	"Johannes Berg" <johannes@...solutions.net>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [BUG] wireless : cpu stuck for 61s

On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 12:53 PM, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi> wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-07-31 at 12:50 +0300, Tomas Winkler wrote:
>> > There's ath5k in the stack trace but that, of course, doesn't
>> > automatically mean it's at fault here. It could have been just the poor
>> > bastard who was the next to allocate 4 KB with kmalloc() noticing the
>> > corruption.
>> >
>> > Hope this helps!
>>
>> I've seen something similar with fragmentation code in iwl4965 but I
>> can reproduce it only when using SLAB. With SLUB it didn't shown up.
>> Does anyone know what is difference between SLAB and SLUB in this context.?
>
> Do you have CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG_ON enabled? (Note: if you only have
> CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG enabled, then you need to enable debugging at run-time
> by passing slub_debug to kernel command line.)

Yes sure I've done that with slub_debug=FZPU
Tomas
--
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/