On Tue, 2014-03-18 at 13:41 +0100, Heiko Carstens wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > your patch "mm-per-thread-vma-caching-fix-5" in linux-next (see below) breaks s390: > > [ 10.101173] kernel BUG at mm/vmacache.c:76! > [ 10.101206] illegal operation: 0001 [#1] SMP DEBUG_PAGEALLOC > [ 10.101210] Modules linked in: > [ 10.101212] CPU: 3 PID: 2286 Comm: ifup-eth Not tainted 3.14.0-rc6-00193-g7f31667faba3 #20 > [ 10.101214] task: 000000003f65cb90 ti: 000000003db30000 task.ti: 000000003db30000 > [ 10.101220] Krnl PSW : 0704d00180000000 000000000025df40 (vma_interval_tree_augment_rotate+0x0/0x64) > [ 10.101222] R:0 T:1 IO:1 EX:1 Key:0 M:1 W:0 P:0 AS:3 CC:1 PM:0 EA:3 > Krnl GPRS: 0000000000000000 0000000000000018 000000003a42cfd0 00000000800fb000 > [ 10.101225] 0000000000000001 000000003f65cb90 0000000000000000 000000003dbacba8 > [ 10.101226] 0705100180000000 000000003dbacb00 000000003f65cb90 000000003dbacb00 > [ 10.101227] 000000003a42cfd0 00000000800fb000 0000000000269e54 000000003db33d80 > [ 10.101235] Krnl Code: 000000000025df32: e3b0c0400020 cg %r11,64(%r12) > 000000000025df38: a784ffd1 brc 8,25deda > #000000000025df3c: a7f40001 brc 15,25df3e > >000000000025df40: e31020180004 lg %r1,24(%r2) > 000000000025df46: e31030180024 stg %r1,24(%r3) > 000000000025df4c: e3302fb0ff04 lg %r3,-80(%r2) > 000000000025df52: e31020400004 lg %r1,64(%r2) > 000000000025df58: e3302fa8ff09 sg %r3,-88(%r2) > [ 10.101251] Call Trace: > [ 10.101253] ([<000000003dbacb00>] 0x3dbacb00) > [ 10.101256] [<00000000007a62da>] do_protection_exception+0x12a/0x3b4 > [ 10.101258] [<00000000007a4862>] pgm_check_handler+0x17a/0x17e > [ 10.101259] [<0000000080086806>] 0x80086806 > [ 10.101260] INFO: lockdep is turned off. > [ 10.101261] Last Breaking-Event-Address: > [ 10.101262] [<000000000025df3c>] vmacache_find+0x80/0x84 > [ 10.101264] > [ 10.101265] Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal exception: panic_on_oops > > Given that this is just an addon patch to Davidlohr's "mm: per-thread > vma caching" patch I was wondering if something in there is architecture > specific. > But it doesn't look like that. So I'm wondering if this only breaks on > s390? No, there isn't anything arch specific. Please note that there are a few other patches in -mm that fix the actual issue that triggers that BUG_ON(), so you'll want to try those. -- 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
