Re: [PROBLEM] 2.6.22-rc2 panics on x86-64 with slub

[Srihari Vijayaraghavan]

--- Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:
[...]
> yes - PROVE_LOCKING reactivates spinlocks even on UP. At least this 
> suggests that you'd have gotten the hang even with maxcpus=1 - i.e. the 
> spinlock corruption is not caused by some genuine SMP race.
 
You're right on the mark there: even with maxcpus=1 or nosmp (or with both),
with PROVE_LOCKING it hung with slub. I didn't mention that so not to confuse
the matter, but you rightly figured that out too.

Thanks



      ___________________________________________________________________________________
How would you spend $50,000 to create a more sustainable environment in Australia?  Go to Yahoo!7 Answers and share your idea.
http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/aunz/lifestyle/answers/y7ans-babp_reg.html

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/