Dave Kleikamp wrote: > 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? I don't think so. > Does reverting that commit fix the problem? (I would be surprised, but > stranger things have happened.) I was also skeptical, and reverting it made no difference. >> 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. I am now using gcc 4.1.2 and seeing the same boot hang problem. -- ~Randy
