linux-ext4 - Re: [patch 003/152] jbd: fix commit of ordered data buffers

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:	Fri, 29 Sep 2006 21:54:30 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@...ibm.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
	torvalds@...l.org, stable@...nel.org,
	ext4 <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 003/152] jbd: fix commit of ordered data buffers

On Friday 29 September 2006 21:18, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org> wrote:
> 
> > gad, there have been so many all-CPU-backtrace patches over the years.
> > 
> > <optimistically cc's Ingo>
> > 
> > Ingo, do you think that's something which we shuld have in the 
> > spinlock debugging code?  A trace to let us see which CPU is holding 
> > that lock, and where from?  I guess if the other cpu is stuck in 
> > spin_lock_irqsave() then we'll get stuck delivering the IPI, so it'd 
> > need to be async.
> 
> used to have this in -rt for i686 and x86_64 for the NMI watchdog tick 
> to print on all CPUs, in the next tick (i.e. no need to actually 
> initiate an IPI) - but it was all a bit hacky [but worked]. It fell 
> victim to some recent flux in that area.

You mean spinlock debugging setting a global variable and the NMI
watchdog testing that?  Makes sense. I can put it on my todo list.

-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html