From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux Netdev List <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PROBLEM] WARNING: at kernel/exit.c:910 do_exit
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2010 20:29:53 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101121192953.GA4495@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=fdtLhdV8OOXLAJPPtdPvMWyo8e3ARbk8gagvc@mail.gmail.com>
On 11/21, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> I do wonder if we should just flag a thread as "busy oopsing" before
> we call "do_exit(), so that _if_ we do a recursive oops we
>
> (a) don't print it out (except just a one-liner to say "recursively
> oopsed in %pS" or something)
> (b) don't try to clean up with do_exit (because that's likely just
> going to oops again or run out of stack etc)
>
> That might have left us with a more visible original oops. Maybe the
> register contents at that point could have given us any ideas (ie
> things like the slab poisoning memory patterns or whatever).
+inf ;)
I thought about this many times. To me, the major offender is
__schedule_bug(). It is quite useful by itself, but every bug with
spinlock held triggers it.
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-21 19:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-21 15:35 [PROBLEM] WARNING: at kernel/exit.c:910 do_exit Pekka Enberg
2010-11-21 17:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-11-21 18:51 ` Oleg Nesterov
2010-11-21 19:11 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-11-21 19:29 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-11-21 15:35 Pekka Enberg
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20101121192953.GA4495@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jaxboe@fusionio.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.