On Thu, 2009-01-29 at 13:15 -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote: > I (try to) do daily build/boot testing. The newly built kernel > is booted via kexec. This was working until sometime between > 2.6.28 and 2.6.29-rc1, so I bisected it.* > > git bisect blames this commit: > > 96777fe7b042e5a5d0fe5fb861fcd6cd80ef9634 is first bad commit > commit 96777fe7b042e5a5d0fe5fb861fcd6cd80ef9634 > Author: Dave Kleikamp <shaggy at linux.vnet.ibm.com> > Date: Thu Jan 8 09:46:31 2009 -0600 > > async: Don't call async_synchronize_full_special() while holding sb_lock > > sync_filesystems() shouldn't be calling async_synchronize_full_special > while holding a spinlock. The second while loop in that function is the > right place for this anyway. > > > The new/kexec-loaded kernel hangs during initcalls. The last one that > I can see (via netconsole, might miss a few of the very last lines) is: > > calling net_ns_init+0x0/0x14d @ 1 > net_namespace: 1008 bytes > initcall net_ns_init+0x0/0x14d returned 0 after 0 usecs > > > > Any ideas/suggestions? I'm not sure about any limitations of git bisect, but it seems unlikely to me that sync_filesystems() would be getting called this early. Are any filesystems even mounted at this point? Does reverting that commit fix the problem? (I would be surprised, but stranger things have happened.) > Thanks. > > > > *caveat: This was all done with the "don't use gcc 4.1.[01] > because it miscompiles __weak" patch reverted. Could that > be an issue/problem here? (I'm using gcc 4.1.1.) I have no idea. Shaggy -- David Kleikamp IBM Linux Technology Center
