Re: Linux-2.6.13-rc7
From: Al Viro (viro_at_parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk)
Date: 08/25/05
- Previous message: Johannes Berg: "Re: Inotify problem [was Re: 2.6.13-rc6-mm1]"
- In reply to: Alexey Dobriyan: "Re: Linux-2.6.13-rc7"
- Next in thread: Richard Henderson: "Re: Linux-2.6.13-rc7"
- Reply: Richard Henderson: "Re: Linux-2.6.13-rc7"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 20:07:55 +0100 To: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 11:27:32AM +0400, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> Mine is alpha-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc (GCC) 3.4.4 (Gentoo 3.4.4)
>
> > Which place triggers it in your build?
>
> net/ipv4/route.c:3152, call to rt_hash_lock_init().
>
> >From preprocessed source (reformatted):
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> typedef struct {
> volatile unsigned int lock;
>
> int on_cpu;
> int line_no;
> void *previous;
> struct task_struct * task;
> const char *base_file;
> } spinlock_t;
>
> static inline void *kmalloc(size_t size, unsigned int flags)
Oh, lovely...
a) gcc4 on alpha refuses to make that inline
b) bug is real, indeed - spinlock debugging + >32 CPU => panic in ip_rt_init()
IMO that's a question to rth: why do we really need to block always_inline
on alpha?
-
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/
- Previous message: Johannes Berg: "Re: Inotify problem [was Re: 2.6.13-rc6-mm1]"
- In reply to: Alexey Dobriyan: "Re: Linux-2.6.13-rc7"
- Next in thread: Richard Henderson: "Re: Linux-2.6.13-rc7"
- Reply: Richard Henderson: "Re: Linux-2.6.13-rc7"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]