[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20060821212043.332fdd0f.akpm@osdl.org>
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 21:20:43 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
To: "Randy.Dunlap" <rdunlap@...otime.net>
Cc: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@...ell.com>,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
"Andi Kleen" <ak@...e.de>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: boot failure, "DWARF2 unwinder stuck at 0xc0100199"
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 09:47:18 -0700
"Randy.Dunlap" <rdunlap@...otime.net> wrote:
> > The 'stuck' unwinder issue at hand already has a fix, though planned to
> > be merged for 2.6.19 only. The crash after switching to the legacy
> > stack trace code is bad, though, but has little to do with the unwinder
> > additions/changes. The way that code reads the stack is just
> > inappropriate in contexts where things must be expected to be broken.
>
> "merged for 2.6.19" meaning:
> - in (before) 2.6.19, or
> - after 2.6.19 is released
>
> If "after," then it will likely need to be added to -stable also,
> so it might as well go in "before" 2.6.19 is released.
Precisely.
Guys, this unwinder change has been quite problematic. We really cannot
let this badness out into 2.6.18 - it degrades our ability to debug every
subsystem in the entire kernel. Would marking it CONFIG_BROKEN get us back
to 2.6.17 behaviour?
Has anyone even tried to reproduce Bruce's crash?
<looks>
argh, ide-scsi. That driver's main use nowadays is for testing the
oops-handling code. Please share .config, machine description and compiler
versiom.
-
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