* Andrew Morton <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 00:47:59 +0100
> Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > it needs to be found out why the preempt_count suddenly went to zero. Is
> > task struct corruption out of question?
>
> Strictly we shouldn't care - we _know_ we've already hit a kernel bug
> and who knows, perhaps that buggy code did an unbalanced
> preempt_disable(). So make the oops code more robust.
>
> otoh, we don't want to be hiding a bug. What piece of code guarantees
> that we ender the oops code with preemption disabled?
i looked at the patch you sent - and there the proof was in the sections
i quoted.
Ingo
--
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]
