From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1754720Ab1KUApA (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Sun, 20 Nov 2011 19:45:00 -0500
Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:14837 "EHLO mga02.intel.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1754566Ab1KUAo6 (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sun, 20 Nov 2011 19:44:58 -0500
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.67,352,1309762800"; 
   d="scan'208";a="78212182"
Subject: Re: WARNING: at mm/slub.c:3357, kernel BUG at mm/slub.c:3413
From: "Alex,Shi" <alex.shi@intel.com>
To: Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@trippelsdorf.de>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
        Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>, Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>,
        "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20111118120201.GA1642@x4.trippels.de>
References: <20111118072519.GA1615@x4.trippels.de>
	 <20111118075521.GB1615@x4.trippels.de> <1321605837.30341.551.camel@debian>
	 <20111118085436.GC1615@x4.trippels.de>
	 <20111118120201.GA1642@x4.trippels.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 08:44:45 +0800
Message-ID: <1321836285.30341.554.camel@debian>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.1 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, 2011-11-18 at 20:02 +0800, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> On 2011.11.18 at 09:54 +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> > On 2011.11.18 at 16:43 +0800, Alex,Shi wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > The dirty flag comes from a bunch of unrelated xfs patches from Christoph, that
> > > > > I'm testing right now.
> > > 
> > > Where is the xfs patchset? I am wondering if it is due to slub code. 
> 
> I begin to wonder if this might be the result of a compiler bug. 
> The kernel in question was compiled with gcc version 4.7.0 20111117. And
> there was commit to the gcc repository today that looks suspicious:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revision&revision=181466
> 

Tell us if it is still there and you can reproduce it.
> Will have to dig deeper, but if this turns out to be the cause of the
> issue, I apologize for the noise.
> 

That's all right.