On Thu, 25 Feb 2016, Linus Torvalds wrote: > >> tty_flip_buffer_push -> > >> (queue_work is inline) -> > >> queue_work_on -> > >> __queue_work -> > >> insert_work -> > >> (wake_up_worker is inlined) > >> wake_up_process -> > > > > try_to_wake_up -> > > > >> *insane non-code address* > > The thing is, we don't actually have that try_to_wake_up() on the > stack in the oops report. There are other thigns on the stack, but the > first stack entry that is dumped that is a text address is that > "ffffffff810a5585" which is wake_up_process. > > That's why I said it might be stack corruption: we might be returning > from try_to_wake_up(), but with a corrupt stack entry, and returning > to garbage. > > If it was one of the calls _in_ try_to_wake_up() that called to insane > code, I would have expected to see try_to_wake_up on the stack. try_to_wake_up() is very likely to be inlined into wake_up_process(), and therefore in such cases will never be on the stack as a return address; it'll always be wake_up_process(). -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html