Re: 2.6.23-rc6-mm1

Andrew Morton
2007-09-19T23:25:10Z

On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 01:02:06 +0200
Tilman Schmidt <tilman@imap.cc> wrote:

> I get several "duplicate file name" messages.
> Hope Greg's the right one to cc on these.
>
> <4>[ 21.211942] Duplicate file names "rtc" detected. [dump_trace+100/498] dump_trace+0x64/0x1f2
> <4>[ 21.216801] [show_trace_log_lvl+26/47] show_trace_log_lvl+0x1a/0x2f
> <4>[ 21.221639] [show_trace+18/20] show_trace+0x12/0x14
> <4>[ 21.226307] [dump_stack+22/24] dump_stack+0x16/0x18
> <4>[ 21.231063] [proc_register+315/332] proc_register+0x13b/0x14c
> <4>[ 21.235814] [create_proc_entry+114/135] create_proc_entry+0x72/0x87
> <4>[ 21.240562] [<faa1d123>] rtc_proc_add_device+0x1d/0x39 [rtc_core]
> <4>[ 21.245304] [<faa1c1f9>] rtc_device_register+0x170/0x207 [rtc_core]
> <4>[ 21.250077] [<faa3c5db>] cmos_do_probe+0x8d/0x1ee [rtc_cmos]
> <4>[ 21.254715] [<faa3c77d>] cmos_pnp_probe+0x41/0x44 [rtc_cmos]
> <4>[ 21.259477] [pnp_device_probe+102/135] pnp_device_probe+0x66/0x87
> <4>[ 21.264206] [driver_probe_device+233/362] driver_probe_device+0xe9/0x16a
> <4>[ 21.268738] [__driver_attach+108/165] __driver_attach+0x6c/0xa5
> <4>[ 21.273387] [bus_for_each_dev+54/91] bus_for_each_dev+0x36/0x5b
> <4>[ 21.277975] [driver_attach+25/27] driver_attach+0x19/0x1b
> <4>[ 21.282501] [bus_add_driver+115/429] bus_add_driver+0x73/0x1ad
> <4>[ 21.286984] [driver_register+103/108] driver_register+0x67/0x6c
> <4>[ 21.291269] [pnp_register_driver+23/25] pnp_register_driver+0x17/0x19
> <4>[ 21.295661] [<faa4000d>] cmos_init+0xd/0xf [rtc_cmos]
> <4>[ 21.300044] [sys_init_module+5544/5953] sys_init_module+0x15a8/0x1741
> <4>[ 21.304406] [sysenter_past_esp+107/181] sysenter_past_esp+0x6b/0xb5
> <4>[ 21.308749] [phys_startup_32+3085673488/3221225472] 0xb7fba410
> <4>[ 21.313108] =======================

Nah, that's an rtc-specific problem.

I think David says that it's actually not a problem, but I didn't
really understand how this can be?

Perhaps I'll need to drop that debugging patch. Which would be a shame,
because it can detect real bugs. Perhaps it needs a strcmp("rtc") to
filter out the (surprising) false positive.