Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757633AbWKXHwr (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Nov 2006 02:52:47 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757630AbWKXHwq (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Nov 2006 02:52:46 -0500 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:16086 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757628AbWKXHwp (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Nov 2006 02:52:45 -0500 Subject: Re: 2.6.19-rc6 : Spontaneous reboots, stack overflows - seems to implicate xfs, scsi, networking, SMP From: Arjan van de Ven To: David Chinner Cc: Ingo Oeser , David Miller , jesper.juhl@gmail.com, chatz@melbourne.sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com, xfs-masters@oss.sgi.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20061124005528.GF11034@melbourne.sgi.com> References: <9a8748490611211551v2ebe88fel2bcf25af004c338a@mail.gmail.com> <20061122.201013.112290046.davem@davemloft.net> <20061123070837.GV11034@melbourne.sgi.com> <200611231416.03387.netdev@axxeo.de> <1164307020.3147.3.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <20061124005528.GF11034@melbourne.sgi.com> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Intel International BV Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 08:52:38 +0100 Message-Id: <1164354759.3147.31.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.1.1 (2.8.1.1-3.fc6) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1313 Lines: 34 On Fri, 2006-11-24 at 11:55 +1100, David Chinner wrote: > On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 07:37:00PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > On Thu, 2006-11-23 at 14:16 +0100, Ingo Oeser wrote: > > > Hi there, > > > > > > David Chinner schrieb: > > > > If the softirqs were run on a different stack, then a lot of these > > > > softirqs DO run on their own stack! > > So they run on a separate stack for 4k stacks on x86? > > They don't run on a separate stack for 8k stacks on x86 - > Jesper's traces show that - so this may indicate an issue > with the methodology used to generate the stack overflow > traces inteh first place. i.e. if 4k stacks use a separate > stack, then most of the reported overflows are spurious > and would not normally occur on 4k stack systems.. > > Can you confirm this, Arjan? yes there are separate stacks for softirq and hardirq context with 4K stacks, but not for 8K stacks. -- if you want to mail me at work (you don't), use arjan (at) linux.intel.com Test the interaction between Linux and your BIOS via http://www.linuxfirmwarekit.org - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/