On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 09:31:42PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-08-01 at 18:18 -0700, Bill Huey wrote:
> > [ 42.124525] <ffffffff8029ae98>{atomic_dec_and_spin_lock+21}
> > [ 42.131032] <ffffffff8025fd89>{schedule+236}
> > [ 42.136195] <ffffffff8026078f>{rt_lock_slowlock+351}
> > [ 42.142086] <ffffffff8026117d>{__lock_text_start+13}
> > [ 42.147966] <ffffffff8029ae98>{atomic_dec_and_spin_lock+21}
> > [ 42.154476] <ffffffff8020c4e9>{dput+57}
> > [ 42.159194] <ffffffff802093f3>{__link_path_walk+1710}
> > [ 42.165166] <ffffffff802617ad>{_raw_spin_unlock+46}
> > [ 42.170961] <ffffffff8020db81>{link_path_walk+103}
> > [ 42.176672] <ffffffff8020be5a>{do_path_lookup+644}
> > [ 42.182379] <ffffffff80223829>{__user_walk_fd+63}
> > [ 42.187994] <ffffffff8023fce4>{vfs_lstat_fd+33}
> > [ 42.193434] <ffffffff8022b3e4>{sys_newlstat+34}
> > [ 42.198871] <ffffffff8025ce3d>{error_exit+0}
> > [ 42.204040] <ffffffff8025bf22>{system_call+126}
>
> This back trace is definitely ugly. Do you get this all the time? And
> if so, could you compile in frame pointers and try again. (I'll dig
> through this in the mean time.)
Not sure, I'm getting hard reboots as well from what looks like more
atomic scheduling violations. I'll tweek my kernel config to be more
friendly about these things. It looked like it was in the rtmutex code,
which is why I CCed you.
Any other configuration suggestions ?
bill
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
