[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4AB74D16.8050802@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 18:53:26 +0900
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
CC: Sachin Sant <sachinp@...ibm.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] slqb: Do not use DEFINE_PER_CPU for per-node data
Hello,
Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 06:00:22PM +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Mel Gorman wrote:
>>>>> Can you please post full dmesg showing the corruption?
>>> There isn't a useful dmesg available and my evidence that it's within the
>>> pcpu allocator is a bit weak.
>> I'd really like to see the memory layout, especially how far apart the
>> nodes are.
>>
>
> Here is the console log with just your patch applied. The node layouts
> are included in the log although I note they are not far apart. What is
> also important is that the exact location of the bug is not reliable
> although it's always in accessing the same structure. This time it was a
> bad data access. The time after that, a BUG_ON triggered when locking a
> spinlock in the same structure. The third time, it locked up silently.
> Forth time, it was a data access error but a different address and so
> on.
One likely possibility is something accessing wrong percpu offset.
Can you please attach .config?
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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