| 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: <20080422062938.0e491c0c.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 06:29:38 -0700 From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> To: hermann pitton <hermann-pitton@...or.de> Cc: brandon@...p.org, jasny@...soft.de, video4linux-list@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mchehab@...radead.org, stable@...nel.org Subject: Re: 2.6.25 regression: vivi - scheduling while atomic > On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 02:08:32 +0200 hermann pitton <hermann-pitton@...or.de> wrote: > Hi, > > Am Montag, den 21.04.2008, 15:37 -0700 schrieb Brandon Philips: > > On 10:16 Mon 21 Apr 2008, Gregor Jasny wrote: > > > Call Trace: > > > [<ffffffff803efc9b>] schedule+0xe5/0x5c7 > > > [<ffffffff80251c90>] __rmqueue_smallest+0x88/0x107 > > > [<ffffffff8023e84b>] getnstimeofday+0x2f/0x83 > > > [<ffffffff8023cf8a>] ktime_get_ts+0x17/0x48 > > > [<ffffffff803f0424>] schedule_timeout+0x1e/0xad > > > [<ffffffff80220498>] enqueue_task+0x13/0x1e > > > [<ffffffff803efab8>] wait_for_common+0xf6/0x16b > > > [<ffffffff802230a0>] default_wake_function+0x0/0xe > > > [<ffffffff8023a270>] kthread_create+0xa3/0x108 > > > [<ffffffff880d2471>] :vivi:vivi_thread+0x0/0x779 > > > [<ffffffff802634cb>] remap_vmalloc_range+0xa1/0xe6 > > > [<ffffffff80231242>] lock_timer_base+0x26/0x4c > > > [<ffffffff8023138e>] __mod_timer+0xb6/0xc5 > > > [<ffffffff880d23fc>] :vivi:vivi_start_thread+0x54/0xc9 > > > [<ffffffff88053603>] :videobuf_core:videobuf_streamon+0x6c/0xaa > > > [<ffffffff8809dba3>] :videodev:__video_do_ioctl+0x1327/0x2ad9 > > > [<ffffffff80222d76>] __wake_up+0x38/0x4f > > > [<ffffffff80242f1f>] futex_wake+0xdb/0xfa > > > [<ffffffff8809f6ab>] :videodev:video_ioctl2+0x17c/0x210 > > > [<ffffffff8025bb36>] handle_mm_fault+0x6b1/0x6cb > > > [<ffffffff8027b47d>] vfs_ioctl+0x55/0x6b > > > [<ffffffff8027b6e6>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x253/0x264 > > > [<ffffffff8027b733>] sys_ioctl+0x3c/0x5d > > > [<ffffffff8020afcb>] system_call_after_swapgs+0x7b/0x80 > > > > > > This happenes on a vanilla 2.6.25 with loaded nvidia graphics module. > > > System architecture is x86_64. If it matters I'll try to reproduce this > > > error on a non tainted kernel. > > > > No need to reproduce on a non-tainted Kernel. This is a known issue > > with patches merged into the v4l-dvb tree several weeks ago but it seems > > to not have made it into 2.6.25 :( > > > > http://linuxtv.org/hg/v4l-dvb/rev/06eb92ed0b18 > > http://linuxtv.org/hg/v4l-dvb/rev/c50180f4ddfc > > > > I can rebase the patches for 2.6.25 but they are too big to go into the > > stable 2.6.25 tree... > > > > Thanks for the report, > > > > Brandon > > > > hmm, because of that 100 lines only rule including offsets? > > The current v4l-dvb on 2.6.24 has 233 modules. > > It is usual that changes, if needed, are going over lots of them. > > How far one can come with _such_ rules, given that one single line > changed counts up to seven with the offsets? > > How can one even comment on that brain damage? > There is no "100 line rule" for -stable patches, if that is what you were referring to. Please just send the patches to stable@...nel.org, along with a full description of why they are needed in 2.6.25.x. If those fine folk see a problem with merging the patches then they will explain that problem and discussion will ensue. It will not involve the term "100 line rule"! -- 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