From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay2.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.29]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63D527F55 for ; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 16:26:09 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35C44304043 for ; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 14:26:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from ipmail06.adl6.internode.on.net (ipmail06.adl6.internode.on.net [150.101.137.145]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id SvAsJFvLSu7he4Iv for ; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 14:26:07 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 09:26:02 +1100 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: 3.14.0-rc2: WARNING: at mm/slub.c:1007 Message-ID: <20140213222602.GK13997@dastard> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Christian Kujau Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 11:53:05AM -0800, Christian Kujau wrote: > Hi, > > after upgrading from 3.13-rc8 to 3.14.0-rc2 on this PowerPC G4 machine, > the WARNING below was printed. > > Shortly after, a lockdep warning appeared (possibly related to my > post to the XFS list yesterday[0]). Unlikely. > Even later in the log an out-of-memory error appeared, that may or may not > be relatd to that WARNING at all but which I'm trying to chase down ever > since 3.13, but which tends to appear more often lately. > > Can anyone take a look if this is something to worry about? Already fixed upstream: commit 255d0884f5635122adb23866b242b4ca112f4bc8 Author: David Rientjes Date: Mon Feb 10 14:25:39 2014 -0800 mm/slub.c: list_lock may not be held in some circumstances Commit c65c1877bd68 ("slub: use lockdep_assert_held") incorrectly required that add_full() and remove_full() hold n->list_lock. The lock is only taken when kmem_cache_debug(s), since that's the only time it actually does anything. Require that the lock only be taken under such a condition. Reported-by: Larry Finger Tested-by: Larry Finger Tested-by: Paul E. McKenney Acked-by: Christoph Lameter Cc: Pekka Enberg Signed-off-by: David Rientjes Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs