On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 10:39 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 6:00 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Please do not add any work destined for v3.10 to your -next included >>> branches until after Linus has release v3.9-rc1. >>> >>> Changes since 20130222: >>> >>> The metag tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree. >>> >>> The kbuild tree gained a build failure so I used the version from >>> next-20130222. >>> >>> The drm tree still has its build failure for which I applied a patch. >>> >>> The watchdog tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree. >>> >>> The akpm tree gained a conflict against the vfs tree and lost lots of >>> patches that turned up elsewhere. >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >> >> With today's Linux-Next I see multiple call-traces pointing to perf >> issues (excerpt, for full dmesg see attachments): >> >> [ 0.093651] Call Trace: >> [ 0.093656] [<ffffffff8112a808>] perf_event_alloc+0x358/0x490 >> [ 0.093661] [<ffffffff810ec230>] ? touch_nmi_watchdog+0x80/0x80 >> [ 0.093666] [<ffffffff8112ac6e>] perf_event_create_kernel_counter+0x2e/0xe0 >> [ 0.093670] [<ffffffff810ec3ed>] watchdog_enable+0xfd/0x1e0 >> [ 0.093676] [<ffffffff81087a3c>] smpboot_thread_fn+0x9c/0x170 >> [ 0.093681] [<ffffffff810879a0>] ? lg_global_lock+0x70/0x70 >> [ 0.093685] [<ffffffff8107fb80>] kthread+0xc0/0xd0 >> [ 0.093689] [<ffffffff8107fac0>] ? flush_kthread_worker+0xb0/0xb0 >> [ 0.093694] [<ffffffff816cc56c>] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0 >> [ 0.093698] [<ffffffff8107fac0>] ? flush_kthread_worker+0xb0/0xb0 >> [ 0.093700] Code: 54 49 89 fc 48 c7 c7 c0 6d f5 81 53 48 83 ec 18 >> e8 e4 a5 f5 ff 41 8b b4 24 a0 00 00 00 41 89 c5 48 8b 05 a2 c9 e2 00 >> 89 f2 30 d2 <3b> 10 74 4a 48 c7 c7 80 6d f5 81 e8 ce ab 22 00 48 89 c3 >> 48 85 >> [ 0.093736] RIP [<ffffffff8112a3e2>] perf_init_event+0x32/0x100 >> [ 0.093740] RSP <ffff880119b93d58> >> [ 0.093742] CR2: 0000000000000000 >> [ 0.093746] ---[ end trace 941ac4690a5bae9e ]--- >> [ 0.104659] Disabled fast string operations >> [ 0.106781] Brought up 4 CPUs >> [ 0.106785] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference >> at (null) >> [ 0.106790] IP: [<ffffffff8112a3e2>] perf_init_event+0x32/0x100 >> [ 0.106791] PGD 0 >> [ 0.106794] Oops: 0000 [#4] SMP >> [ 0.106795] Modules linked in: >> [ 0.106798] CPU 3 >> [ 0.106798] Pid: 22, comm: watchdog/3 Tainted: G D >> 3.8.0-next20130225-1-iniza-small #1 SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. >> 530U3BI/530U4BI/530U4BH/530U3BI/530U4BI/530U4BH >> [ 0.106801] RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff8112a3e2>] [<ffffffff8112a3e2>] >> perf_init_event+0x32/0x100 >> ... >> >> Regards, >> - Sedat - > > I see the same call-traces with today's Linux-Next (next-20130226)! > Any hints/help? > > - Sedat - [ CC Tejun and Borislav ] This turned out to be a idr issue [1]. Thanks Borislav for his help. Reverting "idr: implement lookup hint" commit [2] makes the call-traces go away. - Sedat - [1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=136197056415722&w=2 [2] http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git;a=commit;h=29cf29e1fbb875019713eb55cf27ec35f1e5fa5e -- 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
