[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <47B61708.7070006@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 23:49:44 +0100
From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
To: Denys Fedoryshchenko <denys@...p.net.lb>
CC: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: BUG/ spinlock lockup, 2.6.24
Jarek Poplawski wrote, On 02/15/2008 10:03 PM:
...
> ...On the other hand this:
>
>> Feb 15 15:50:17 217.151.X.X [1521315.068984] BUG: spinlock lockup on CPU#1,
>> ksoftirqd/1/7, f0551180
>
> seems to point just at spinlock lockup, so it's more about the full report.
> I wonder if this patch to prink could help here:
>
> author Ingo Molnar <mingo at elte.hu>
> Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:07:58 +0000 (21:07 +0100)
> printk: make printk more robust by not allowing recursion
>
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=32a76006683f7b28ae3cc491da37716e002f198e
...or maybe a patch like this attached here?
Jarek P.
View attachment "spinlock_debug.diff" of type "text/x-diff" (734 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists