On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 08:32:12PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 03:15:39PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 10:53:23AM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > > > My fuzz tester keeps hitting this. Every instance shows the non-irq stack > > > came in from mlockall. I'm only seeing this on one box, but that has more > > > ram (8gb) than my other machines, which might explain it. > > > > Are you building CONFIG_PREEMPT=n? I don't see any preemption points in > > do_mlockall(), so a range containing enough vmas might well stall the > > CPU in that case. > > That was with full preempt. > > > Does the patch below help? If so, we probably need others, but let's > > first see if this one helps. ;-) > > I'll try it on Monday. Given full preempt, I wouldn't think that my patch would have any effect, but look forward to hearing what happens. Hmmm.... Were you running mlockall() concurrently from a bunch of different processes sharing lots of memory via mmap() or some such? Thanx, Paul -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>