linux-kernel - Re: [3.2+] BUG: scheduling while atomic: swapper/0/0/0x10000100

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: <1327595767.2062.7.camel@scapa>
Date:	Thu, 26 Jan 2012 17:36:07 +0100
From:	Yves-Alexis Perez <corsac@...ian.org>
To:	balbi@...com
Cc:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@...esas.com>,
	linux-usb@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [3.2+] BUG: scheduling while atomic: swapper/0/0/0x10000100

On jeu., 2012-01-26 at 18:31 +0200, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > Very odd, it wouldn't seem that this patch would cause such a problem,
> > as it is "obviously" correct.
> 
> The funny thing is that I don't think there's any x86 system out there
> with this *DRD* controller :-) 

Out of curiosity, what is a DRD controler?

> Specially when you consider the fact that
> it's very recently that we dropped the ARCH dependency with commit
> d242c110c43b55aaf3ebb3ceac1eeab0d452a177
> 
> > Kuninori, any thoughts about this?  Should I revert this from the
> > tree?
> 
> I don't think so, I think this was a bad bisection.
> 
Maybe (especially since the first bad commit is a merge commit, so I'm
not completely sure I did correctly the second bisect). But I'm puzzled
why reverting the commit on top of 3.2.1 fixes that. And now that Felipe
mentions it, USB Gadget is not even compiled, so I'm completely lost.
-- 
Yves-Alexis

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)