[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110112120349.GH24920@pengutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 13:03:49 +0100
From: Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
kernel@...gutronix.de, Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk>,
Soren Sandmann <ssp@...hat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: BUG: spinlock recursion (sys_chdir, user_path_at,
do_path_lookup ...)
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 11:57:50AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jan 2011, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > > [ 75.280000] r5:be961ee4 r4:00063015
> > >
> > > I started to bisect, but already the first test case showed a different
> > > error (my getty dying every few seconds).
> > I bisected this one now, the first bad commit is
> >
> > 9c0729d (x86: Eliminate bp argument from the stack tracing routines)
> >
> > . It made a x86 specific change to include/linux/stacktrace.h.
>
> As I said on IRC already, that's complete nonsense. The commit changes
> a function prototype which is only relevant for x86. So how should
> that affect ARM ?
hmm, the conversion that you probably mean is:
22:26 < ukleinek> hmm, 9c0729dc8062bed96189bd14ac6d4920f3958743 is the first bad commit
22:26 < tglx> lol
22:26 * ukleinek goes to bed
22:27 < ukleinek> then it can only be about include/linux/stacktrace.h
22:27 * ukleinek goes to bed anyhow
22:28 < rostedt> ukleinek: btw, you could do the bisect automated with ktest.pl :-)
22:30 < tglx> ukleinek: right, a change to include/linux/stacktrace.h which is x86 specific
22:33 < tglx> makes arm explode
22:33 < tglx> rotfl
I admit I didn't look what was changed there and I understood your
statement as "the change to include/linux/stacktrace.h was x86 specific
and so broke ARM".
I will look into it again after lunch.
> > According to tglx the lockup above "is related to nicks scalability
> > stuff". I havn't researched yet the offending commit. Is that
> > necessary?
>
> Only if you are interested that the problem gets fixed.
OK, will do.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
--
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