[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87d2s2to4z.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2013 15:26:28 +0930
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To: Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>,
Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@...atus.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Please add to stable: module: don't unlink the module until we've removed all exposure.
Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com> writes:
>> It at least works around the problem for me as well. But, a more rare
>> migration/[0-3] (I think) related lockup still exists in 3.9.4 for me,
>> so I will also try applying that other kobject patch and continue testing
>> today...
>
> Well, that other kobject patch is already in 3.9.4, so I think it's still
> a good idea to include the
> "module: don't unlink the module until we've removed all exposure."
> patch in stable. I have a decent test case to reproduce the crash, so if someone
> wants me to test other patches instead, then I will do so.
OK, I cannot reproduce on 3.9.4. I #if 0'd out the WARNs in sysfs and
kobject, and did this (which reliably broke on 3.8):
# M=`modinfo -F filename e1000`
# for i in `seq 10000`; do insmod $M; rmmod e1000; done >/dev/null 2>&1 & for i in `seq 10000`; do insmod $M; rmmod e1000; done > /dev/null 2>&1 & for i in `seq 10000`; do insmod $M; rmmod e1000; done > /dev/null 2>&1 & for i in `seq 10000`; do insmod $M; rmmod e1000; done >/dev/null 2>&1 &
#
This was under kvm, 4-way SMP, init=/bin/bash.
Do you have a backtrace of the 3.9.4 crash? You can add "CFLAGS_module.o
= -O0" to get a clearer backtrace if you want...
Thanks,
Rusty.
--
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