Subject: Re: Mysterious CFQ crash and RCU
From: Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl>
To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>, Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com>,
        linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20110521235408.GK2271@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
References: <20110519222404.GG12600@redhat.com>
	 <20110521210013.GJ2271@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	 <1306016630.2066.44.camel@x61.thuisdomein>
	 <20110521235408.GK2271@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 21:30:57 +0200
Message-ID: <1306092657.2066.53.camel@x61.thuisdomein>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1100
Lines: 26

On Sat, 2011-05-21 at 16:54 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 12:23:50AM +0200, Paul Bolle wrote: 
> > Is anyone able to spot one or more commits in v2.6.39-rc7..v2.6.39 that
> > might have fixed this Oops? Or did my chance of hitting this Oops,
> > somehow, just got a lot smaller in v.2.6.39?

As I just discovered, Fedora Rawhide ships release candidates configured
with a lot more debugging options set than it ships final releases. So,
sadly, this didn't get fixed in v2.6.39. It just didn't show up because
one or more configuration options weren't set while they used to be set
in the preceding release candidates kernels.

> 5f45c69589b7d ("read_lock() does not always imply rcu_read_lock()") might
> well be a fix.

It doesn't really matter anymore, but that one was actually already
included in v2.6.39-rc5.


Paul Bolle

--
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/