linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.26-rc: SPARC: Sun Ultra 10 can not boot

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]

Message-ID: <a4423d670806201419i2f0c0982j69eb423f9ecd239d@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 21 Jun 2008 01:19:29 +0400
From:	"Alexander Beregalov" <a.beregalov@...il.com>
To:	"David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.26-rc: SPARC: Sun Ultra 10 can not boot

2008/6/20 David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>:
> When you revert that changeset, there is a loop in the backtrace of
> all kernel threads, and therefore lockdep turns itself off when all of
> the stack backtrace slots get consumed by that loop in the backtraces.
>
> After the revert you should see a set of kernel messages like:
>
> BUG: MAX_STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES too low!
> turning off the locking correctness validator.
>
> and that would confirm my theory.

No, I do not have such messages.
Does it mean that we need different explanation?
--
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/