linux-kernel - Re: How how latent should non-preemptive scheduling be?

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:  <48D9460C.5040504@yahoo.com>
Date:	Tue, 23 Sep 2008 20:39:56 +0100
From:	Sitsofe Wheeler <sitsofe@...oo.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject:  Re: How how latent should non-preemptive scheduling be?

Sitsofe Wheeler wrote:
> I've been struggling to boot -tip/master - currently it blows up just 
> after printing SLUB information saying:
> 
> BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 00000004
> IP: [<c0120078>] account_system_time+0x48/0x120
> *pde = 00000000
> Thread overran stack, or stack corrupted
> Oops: 0002 [#1] PREEMPT

OK this BUG seems to have gone away in the past few hours.

Ingo when you were asking for the ftrace report I presume that would be 
for a non preempt kernel (as a preemptive one only showed a very worst 
latency of 19657 us in one exceptional case)?

-- 
Sitsofe | http://sucs.org/~sits/

--
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/