[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1306338149.2820.27.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 17:42:29 +0200
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc: James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: SLUB regression in current Linus
Le mercredi 25 mai 2011 à 09:47 -0500, Christoph Lameter a écrit :
> On Wed, 25 May 2011, James Morris wrote:
>
> > It turned out the system was still unstable with the attached config
> > (e.g. spontaneous reboot).
>
> Ahh. Thank you.
>
> Here is the fix:
>
> Subject: slub: Fix double bit unlock in debug mode
>
> Commit 442b06bcea23a01934d3da7ec5898fa154a6cafb added a deactivate_slab()
> in the debug case in __slab_alloc(). deactivate_slab() unlocks the current
> slab used for allocation. Going to the label unlock_out: does it again.
>
> So simply return the object. In the debug case we do not need all the other
> processing that unlock_out: does.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
>
> ---
> mm/slub.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> Index: linux-2.6/mm/slub.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/mm/slub.c 2011-05-25 09:41:27.000000000 -0500
> +++ linux-2.6/mm/slub.c 2011-05-25 09:41:39.000000000 -0500
> @@ -1884,7 +1884,8 @@ debug:
> deactivate_slab(s, c);
> c->page = NULL;
is this c->page = NULL; really necessary ?
Thanks !
> c->node = NUMA_NO_NODE;
> - goto unlock_out;
> + local_irq_restore(flags);
> + return object;
> }
>
> /*
--
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