linux-kernel - Re: [2.6.24 REGRESSION] BUG: Soft lockup

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-Id: <20080205141944.773140a1.zaitcev@redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 5 Feb 2008 14:19:44 -0800
From:	Pete Zaitcev <zaitcev@...hat.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	"Oliver Pinter" <oliver.pntr@...il.com>,
	"Linux Kernel" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, "James Morris" <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, zaitcev@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [2.6.24 REGRESSION] BUG: Soft lockup - with VFS

On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 14:05:06 -0800, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> Looks like you deadlocked in ub_request_fn().  I assume that you were using
> ub.c in 2.6.23 and that it worked OK?  If so, we broke it, possibly via
> changes to the core block layer.
> 
> I think ub.c is basically abandoned in favour of usb-storage.  If so,
> perhaps we should remove or disble ub.c?

Actually I think it may be an argument for keeping ub, if ub exposes
a bug in the __blk_end_request. I'll look at the head of the thread
and see if Mr. Pinter has hit anything related to Mr. Ueda's work.

-- Pete
--
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/