It seems that 2.3.x is still giving me a really hard time on my dual
pentiums :
ksymoops 0.7c on i686 2.2.13. Options used
-v /usr/src/linux/vmlinux (specified)
-K (specified)
-L (specified)
-O (specified)
-m /usr/src/linux/System.map (specified)
CPU: 0
EIP: 0010:[<c012ba73>]
Using defaults from ksymoops -t elf32-i386 -a i386
EFLAGS: 00010286
eax: 0000009f ebx: c00ee0d8 ecx: c00eefe0 edx: ffffffff
esi: 00000028 edi: c00eefe0 ebp: c1185740 esp: c163be08
ds: 0018 es: 0018 ss: 0018
Process patch (pid: 682, stackpage=c163b000)
Stack: 00000282 00000003 c163bea4 00000020 c00eefe0 c01501c3 00000293 00000001
00000003 00000000 c012bcd4 c1185740 00000003 c0266f60 c0266f60 00000000
00000400 c0133836 c1185740 00000003 c0266f60 00000000 c0133902 00000001
Call Trace: [<c01501c3>] [<c012bcd4>] [<c0133836>] [<c0133902>] [<c0133e6b>] [<c0134081>] [<c0134000>]
[<c01268e4>] [<c0128de8>] [<c014eb41>] [<c0134000>] [<c01310a6>] [<c010afa4>]
Code: 89 02 8b 12 4e 83 fe ff 75 bb c7 02 00 00 00 00 fa f0 0f ba
>>EIP; c012ba73 <kmem_cache_grow+2b3/3a0> <=====
Trace; c01501c3 <block_getblk+193/390>
Trace; c012bcd4 <kmem_cache_alloc+114/190>
Trace; c0133836 <get_unused_buffer_head+56/100>
Trace; c0133902 <create_buffers+22/370>
Trace; c0133e6b <create_empty_buffers+2b/90>
Trace; c0134081 <block_write_partial_page+81/3f0>
Trace; c0134000 <block_write_partial_page+0/3f0>
Trace; c01268e4 <add_to_page_cache_unique+c4/160>
Trace; c0128de8 <generic_file_write+2e8/3f0>
Trace; c014eb41 <ext2_file_write+21/c0>
Trace; c0134000 <block_write_partial_page+0/3f0>
Trace; c01310a6 <sys_write+e6/110>
Trace; c010afa4 <system_call+34/38>
Code; c012ba73 <kmem_cache_grow+2b3/3a0>
00000000 <_EIP>:
Code; c012ba73 <kmem_cache_grow+2b3/3a0> <=====
0: 89 02 movl %eax,(%edx) <=====
Code; c012ba75 <kmem_cache_grow+2b5/3a0>
2: 8b 12 movl (%edx),%edx
Code; c012ba77 <kmem_cache_grow+2b7/3a0>
4: 4e decl %esi
Code; c012ba78 <kmem_cache_grow+2b8/3a0>
5: 83 fe ff cmpl $0xffffffff,%esi
Code; c012ba7b <kmem_cache_grow+2bb/3a0>
8: 75 bb jne ffffffc5 <_EIP+0xffffffc5> c012ba38 <kmem_cache_grow+278/3a0>
Code; c012ba7d <kmem_cache_grow+2bd/3a0>
a: c7 02 00 00 00 movl $0x0,(%edx)
Code; c012ba82 <kmem_cache_grow+2c2/3a0>
f: 00
Code; c012ba83 <kmem_cache_grow+2c3/3a0>
10: fa cli
Code; c012ba84 <kmem_cache_grow+2c4/3a0>
11: f0 0f ba lock (bad)
Compiled with gcc 2.7.2.3, if that matters.
Can anyone (mm experts ?) sugest a way to track this down ? This is
100% repetable within minutes (as always, 2.2.x is OK).
I really want to help killing this one ASAP !
M.
-- Places change, faces change. Life is so very strange.- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/