[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 2009 02:36:03 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PATCH] TTY patches for 2.6.33-git
On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 11:10:32 +0100 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
>
> * Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> > Seems to be quite .config-dependent.
>
> My theory is that it's a race and that it's thus timing dependent. TTY
> SMP details get stressed most during a particular point during bootup,
> when all the mingetty's are starting up all at once and race with each
> other.
>
> If you are lucky to not hit the bug then, then the likelyhood is much
> lower later on.
>
> It would be nice if Alan posted his TTY stress-testing code. It could
> potentially make this bug bisectable.
>
I'm surprised that lockdep didn't notice that ab/ba I thought I saw.
Maybe the do_tty_hangup()->tty_fasync() never happens.
The machine I can reproduce this on is at work and I'm not, until
Monday. I'd try removing the files_lock() calls from tty_io.c, see if
that helps.
I had
[ 71.553228] Warning: dev (tty1) tty->count(7) != #fd's(6) in tty_release_dev
come out once, then it went away.
--
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