| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <1154118476.10196.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 22:27:55 +0200 From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> To: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com> Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>, alokk@...softinc.com Subject: Re: [BUG] Lockdep recursive locking in kmem_cache_free On Fri, 2006-07-28 at 13:18 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Fri, 28 Jul 2006, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > On Fri, 2006-07-28 at 08:35 -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote: > > > On Fri, 28 Jul 2006, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > > > > If you need more info, I can add debugs. It happens every bootup. > > > > > > Could you tell me why _spin_lock and _spin_unlock seem > > > to be calling into the slab allocator? Also what is child_rip()? Cannot > > > find that function upstream. > > > > arch/x86_64/kernel/entry.S > > Ah. Ok wrong arch. Why does _spin_unlock_irq call child_rip and then end > up in the slab allocator? > > Why does _spin_lock call kmem_cache_free? > > Is the stack trace an accurate representation of the calling sequence? Probably not. Thats a call tail optimization artifact. I retest with UNWIND info =y tglx - 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