On Thu, 2010-12-23 at 10:08 +0800, Yong Zhang wrote: > > systemd--1251 0d..5. 2015398us : enqueue_task_fair <-enqueue_task > > systemd--1251 0d..5. 2015398us : print_runqueue <-enqueue_task_fair > > systemd--1251 0d..5. 2015399us : __print_runqueue: cfs_rq: c2407c34, nr: 3, load: 3072 > > systemd--1251 0d..5. 2015400us : __print_runqueue: curr: f6a8de5c, comm: systemd-cgroups/1251, load: 1024 > > systemd--1251 0d..5. 2015401us : __print_runqueue: se: f69e6300, load: 1024, > > systemd--1251 0d..5. 2015401us : __print_runqueue: cfs_rq: f69e6540, nr: 2, load: 2048 > > systemd--1251 0d..5. 2015402us : __print_runqueue: curr: (null) > > systemd--1251 0d..5. 2015402us : __print_runqueue: se: f69e65a0, load: 4137574976, > > the load == f69e65a0 == address of se, odd This appears to be consistently true, I've also found that in between these two prints, there is a free_sched_group() freeing that exact entry. So post-print is a use-after-free artifact. What's interesting is that its freeing a cfs_rq struct with nr_running=1, that should not be possible... /me goes stare at the whole cgroup task attach vs cgroup destruction muck. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
