Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757528AbXEUTDS (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 May 2007 15:03:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756769AbXEUTDH (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 May 2007 15:03:07 -0400 Received: from brick.kernel.dk ([80.160.20.94]:16995 "EHLO kernel.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756759AbXEUTDF (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 May 2007 15:03:05 -0400 Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 21:00:43 +0200 From: Jens Axboe To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Hugh Dickins , Srihari Vijayaraghavan , Oliver Xymoron , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PROBLEM] 2.6.22-rc2 panics on x86-64 with slub Message-ID: <20070521190043.GA4705@kernel.dk> References: <20070520133505.46147.qmail@web52609.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1898 Lines: 47 On Mon, May 21 2007, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Mon, 21 May 2007, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > > On Mon, 21 May 2007, Christoph Lameter wrote: > > > On Mon, 21 May 2007, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > > > > > > Yes, sounded the same to me too: I couldn't reproduce it or see anything > > > > wrong in the code back then. But Srihari's info about CONFIG_DEBUG_SLUB > > > > off has helped a lot: I was then able to reproduce it on my x86_64, and > > > > after a lot of staring at the code, the problem became obvious... > > > > > > Right. The #ifdef CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG is at the wrong location. The best fix > > > is to moving the #ifdef otherwise the size is still wrong for the > > > ctor case. > > > > ? My patch did handle the ctor case. > > True. I was thinking about just checking the problem case that we had > here. > > > > SLUB Debug: Fix object size calculation > > > > > > The object size calculation is wrong if !CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG because > > > the #ifdef CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG is now switching off the size adjustments > > > for DESTROY_BY_RCU and ctor. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter > > > > Yes, I think that should do it too. The reason behind my repeating > > the block was to handle the case where SLAB_POISON is passed to > > kmem_cache_create, but CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG is off. But apparently > > that case would hit the BUG_ON(flags & ~CREATE_MASK), therefore > > your patch is simpler and better. Quite a maze. > > Would you ack my patch? I do not want to repeat the block. I can test whatever you want tomorrow morning, it was 100% repeatable here. So which one, your patch or Hughs? -- Jens Axboe - 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/