On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 15:20:15 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > On Wed, 3 Sep 2008 22:05:46 -0700 Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Thank gawd for that. > > > > This breakage spans over 1000 commits. Not sure how that can happen in > > a rebased tree, but whatever. > > It happens because I merge that tree into linux-next early in the > sequence and the two builds I do after each merge did not get the error > (*and* David really did not do enough testing ...). The set of builds I > do after merging all the trees hit that so I added a commit to the end of > linux-next to fix it. > > That particular build bug will not be in today's linux-next because that > particular tree has been fixed. > After fix-odd iterations: netconsole: remote IP 192.168.2.111 netconsole: remote ethernet address 00:19:d1:04:8f:42 netconsole: device eth0 not up yet, forcing it e100: eth0: e100_watchdog: link up, 100Mbps, full-duplex netconsole: carrier detect appears untrustworthy, waiting 4 seconds Clocksource tsc unstable (delta = -499885471 ns) console [netcon0] enabled NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth0 (e100): transmit timed out ------------[ cut here ]------------ WARNING: at net/sched/sch_generic.c:221 dev_watchdog+0x11c/0x192() Modules linked in: Pid: 1, comm: swapper Tainted: G W 2.6.27-rc5 #7 [<c011e67e>] warn_on_slowpath+0x41/0x65 [<c01387f9>] ? print_lock_contention_bug+0x11/0xb2 [<c0119138>] ? __wake_up+0x31/0x3b [<c013805a>] ? trace_hardirqs_off+0xb/0xd [<c0326762>] ? _spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x54/0x58 [<c0119138>] ? __wake_up+0x31/0x3b [<c012ba7a>] ? __queue_work+0x26/0x2b [<c013a9cd>] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0xb/0xd [<c0326762>] ? _spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x54/0x58 [<c012ba7a>] ? __queue_work+0x26/0x2b [<c012bb92>] ? queue_work_on+0x27/0x31 [<c012bc55>] ? queue_work+0x3f/0x45 [<c012bc6a>] ? schedule_work+0xf/0x11 [<c02660e0>] ? e100_tx_timeout+0xd/0xf [<c02d2ee2>] dev_watchdog+0x11c/0x192 [<c01387f9>] ? print_lock_contention_bug+0x11/0xb2 [<c0125920>] ? run_timer_softirq+0x102/0x16c [<c013a9cd>] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0xb/0xd [<c012592f>] run_timer_softirq+0x111/0x16c [<c02d2dc6>] ? dev_watchdog+0x0/0x192 [<c02d2dc6>] ? dev_watchdog+0x0/0x192 [<c012240a>] __do_softirq+0x51/0xa8 [<c0122490>] do_softirq+0x2f/0x47 [<c0122712>] irq_exit+0x3b/0x79 [<c01115f2>] smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x63/0x6e [<c01043dd>] apic_timer_interrupt+0x2d/0x34 [<c011eb90>] ? release_console_sem+0x16e/0x1ab [<c011eb94>] ? release_console_sem+0x172/0x1ab [<c011f35b>] register_console+0x20e/0x216 [<c0493587>] init_netconsole+0x12f/0x185 [<c0101125>] _stext+0x3d/0x11d [<c0493458>] ? init_netconsole+0x0/0x185 [<c01a98ca>] ? create_proc_entry+0x6c/0x80 [<c0153692>] ? register_irq_proc+0x74/0x8d [<c047a6e2>] kernel_init+0x66/0xb4 [<c047a67c>] ? kernel_init+0x0/0xb4 [<c010456f>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x10 ======================= ---[ end trace 4eaa2a86a8e2da22 ]--- netconsole: network logging started initcall init_netconsole+0x0/0x185 returned 0 after 5916 msecs calling init_sd+0x0/0xdf and it's dead. This is extremely irritating. I'll see if I cen reproduce the bug I'm actually tring to find with E100=n. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
