Re: 2.6.26-rc4: RIP __call_for_each_cic+0x20/0x50
- From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 15:35:10 +0200
On Tue, May 27 2008, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 02:37:19PM +0400, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
@@ -41,8 +41,8 @@ int put_io_context(struct io_context *ioc)
rcu_read_lock();
if (ioc->aic && ioc->aic->dtor)
ioc->aic->dtor(ioc->aic);
- rcu_read_unlock();
cfq_dtor(ioc);
+ rcu_read_unlock();
kmem_cache_free(iocontext_cachep, ioc);
return 1;
This helps in sense that 3 times bulk cross-compiles finish to the end.
You'll hear me if another such oops will resurface.
Still looking good?
Yup!
And this with patch in mainline, again with PREEMPT_RCU.
Ping, this happened again with 2.6.26-rc4 and PREEMPT_RCU.
Worrisome... Paul, would you mind taking a quick look at cfq
and see if you can detect why breaks with preempt rcu? It's
clearly a use-after-free symptom, but I don't see how it can
happen.
--
Jens Axboe
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: 2.6.26-rc4: RIP __call_for_each_cic+0x20/0x50
- From: Paul E. McKenney
- Re: 2.6.26-rc4: RIP __call_for_each_cic+0x20/0x50
- References:
- Re: 2.6.25-$sha1: RIP call_for_each_cic+0x25/0x50
- From: Jens Axboe
- Re: 2.6.25-$sha1: RIP call_for_each_cic+0x25/0x50
- From: Alexey Dobriyan
- 2.6.25-$sha1: RIP __call_for_each_cic+0x20/0x50
- From: Alexey Dobriyan
- 2.6.26-rc4: RIP __call_for_each_cic+0x20/0x50
- From: Alexey Dobriyan
- Re: 2.6.25-$sha1: RIP call_for_each_cic+0x25/0x50
- Prev by Date: Re: PROBLEM: Serial error
- Next by Date: Re: trace_mark ugliness
- Previous by thread: 2.6.26-rc4: RIP __call_for_each_cic+0x20/0x50
- Next by thread: Re: 2.6.26-rc4: RIP __call_for_each_cic+0x20/0x50
- Index(es):