linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 18 [ call-trace: drm | x86 | smp

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: <517198A7.8020904@surriel.com>
Date:	Fri, 19 Apr 2013 15:19:03 -0400
From:	Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>
To:	sedat.dilek@...il.com
CC:	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	linux-next <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	x86@...nel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Paul McKenney <paul.mckenney@...aro.org>,
	DRI <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
	Dave Airlie <airlied@...hat.com>,
	Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@...com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Emmanuel Benisty <benisty.e@...il.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 18 [ call-trace: drm | x86 | smp | rcu
 related? ]

On 04/19/2013 02:53 PM, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 6:43 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com> wrote:
>
>> I tried to switch from SLUB to SLAB...
>>
>> ...and also from VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING_GEN to TICK_CPU_ACCOUNTING.
>>
>> 2x NOPE.
>>
>> In one kernel-build I saw in my console...
>>
>>       semop(1): encountered an error: Identifier removed
>>
>> ...if this says sth. to you.
>>
> [ CC folks from below thread ]
>
> I have found a thread called "Re: ipc,sem: sysv semaphore scalability"
> on LKML with a screenshot that shows the same call-trace.
> I followed it a bit.
> There is a patch in [3]... unconfirmed.
>
> Comments on the rcu read-lock and "sem_lock()" vs "sem_unlock()" from Linus.
>
> What's the status of this discussion?
>
> - Sedat -
>
> [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/3/30/6
> [2] http://i.imgur.com/uk6gmq1.jpg
> [3] https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/3/31/12
> [4] https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/3/31/77
>
I am at a conference right now, but when I get
back I will check linux-next vs. all the fixes from
the semaphore scalability email thread.

I will gather up the not-yet-in-linux-next fixes,
and will send them to Andrew for inclusion.

No guarantee that those fixes are related to
your problem, of course :)
--
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/