* Martin-Éric Racine <q-funk@xxxxxx> wrote: > 2009/8/16 Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>: > > > > * Martin-Éric Racine <q-funk@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 9:34 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki<rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > On Thursday 13 August 2009, Martin-Éric Racine wrote: > >> >> On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 5:54 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki<rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> > On Thursday 13 August 2009, Martin-Éric Racine wrote: > >> >> >> 2009/8/13 Martin-Éric Racine <q-funk@xxxxxx>: > >> >> >> > On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 12:07 PM, Ingo Molnar<mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> >> >> * Martin-Éric Racine <q-funk@xxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> >> >>> Yes, this bug is still valid. > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> Ubuntu kernel team member Leann Ogasawara and I are slowly > >> >> >> >>> bisecting our way through the changes that took place since 2.6.30 > >> >> >> >>> to find the commit that introduced this regression. Please stay > >> >> >> >>> tuned. > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> hm, the only outright Geode related commit was: > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> d6c585a: x86: geode: Mark mfgpt irq IRQF_TIMER to prevent resume failure > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> the jpg at: > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> http://launchpadlibrarian.net/28892781/00002.jpg > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> is very out of focus - but what i could decypher suggests a > >> >> >> >> pagefault crash in the VFS code, in generic_delete_inode(). > >> >> >> > >> >> >> This one might be a bit better: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> http://launchpadlibrarian.net/30267494/2.6.31-5.24.jpg > >> > > >> > Hmm. This looks like a sysfs oops to my untrained eye. > >> > >> The bisect I did with Leann Ogasawara has narrowed the kernel panic > >> down to the following: > >> > >> commit f19d4a8fa6f9b6ccf54df0971c97ffcaa390b7b0 > >> Author: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Date: Mon Jun 8 19:50:45 2009 -0400 > >> > >> add caching of ACLs in struct inode > >> > >> No helpers, no conversions yet. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Weird. If the functions do what their name suggests, i.e. if > > inode_init_always() is an always called constructor and if > > destroy_inode() is an unconditional destructor then this patch > > should have no functional effect on the VFS side. > > > > It increases the size of struct inode, so if you have some old > > module (built to an older version of fs.h) still around it might > > corrupt your inode data structure. > > > > Or the size change might trigger some dormant bug. It might move a > > critical inode right into the path of a pre-existing (but not > > visibly crash-triggering) data corruption. > > > > The possibilities on the 'weird bug' front are endless - the > > crash/oops itself should be turned into text, posted here and > > analyzed. > > If you mean something else than the large-size snapshot of the > whole panic output that was linked earlier in this thread, I'd > appreciate instructions on how to turn that crash into text. it's still a JPG - posting the transcribed oops in email text would certainly help more folks looking over it. (painful i know ...) Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-testers" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
