From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754087AbYIDGB4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Sep 2008 02:01:56 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751100AbYIDGBr (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Sep 2008 02:01:47 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:38730 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751835AbYIDGBq (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Sep 2008 02:01:46 -0400 Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2008 23:01:29 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML , Yinghai Lu , Linus Torvalds , David Woodhouse Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for September 3 Message-Id: <20080903230129.806d54af.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20080904152015.3145b06e.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> References: <20080903191619.6b6b230e.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20080903214634.ea17ff53.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080903215455.792c78a3.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080904145744.3f791ca7.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20080903220546.bd673658.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080904152015.3145b06e.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.8 (GTK+ 2.12.5; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 15:20:15 +1000 Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > On Wed, 3 Sep 2008 22:05:46 -0700 Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > Thank gawd for that. > > > > This breakage spans over 1000 commits. Not sure how that can happen in > > a rebased tree, but whatever. > > It happens because I merge that tree into linux-next early in the > sequence and the two builds I do after each merge did not get the error > (*and* David really did not do enough testing ...). The set of builds I > do after merging all the trees hit that so I added a commit to the end of > linux-next to fix it. > > That particular build bug will not be in today's linux-next because that > particular tree has been fixed. > After fix-odd iterations: netconsole: remote IP 192.168.2.111 netconsole: remote ethernet address 00:19:d1:04:8f:42 netconsole: device eth0 not up yet, forcing it e100: eth0: e100_watchdog: link up, 100Mbps, full-duplex netconsole: carrier detect appears untrustworthy, waiting 4 seconds Clocksource tsc unstable (delta = -499885471 ns) console [netcon0] enabled NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth0 (e100): transmit timed out ------------[ cut here ]------------ WARNING: at net/sched/sch_generic.c:221 dev_watchdog+0x11c/0x192() Modules linked in: Pid: 1, comm: swapper Tainted: G W 2.6.27-rc5 #7 [] warn_on_slowpath+0x41/0x65 [] ? print_lock_contention_bug+0x11/0xb2 [] ? __wake_up+0x31/0x3b [] ? trace_hardirqs_off+0xb/0xd [] ? _spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x54/0x58 [] ? __wake_up+0x31/0x3b [] ? __queue_work+0x26/0x2b [] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0xb/0xd [] ? _spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x54/0x58 [] ? __queue_work+0x26/0x2b [] ? queue_work_on+0x27/0x31 [] ? queue_work+0x3f/0x45 [] ? schedule_work+0xf/0x11 [] ? e100_tx_timeout+0xd/0xf [] dev_watchdog+0x11c/0x192 [] ? print_lock_contention_bug+0x11/0xb2 [] ? run_timer_softirq+0x102/0x16c [] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0xb/0xd [] run_timer_softirq+0x111/0x16c [] ? dev_watchdog+0x0/0x192 [] ? dev_watchdog+0x0/0x192 [] __do_softirq+0x51/0xa8 [] do_softirq+0x2f/0x47 [] irq_exit+0x3b/0x79 [] smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x63/0x6e [] apic_timer_interrupt+0x2d/0x34 [] ? release_console_sem+0x16e/0x1ab [] ? release_console_sem+0x172/0x1ab [] register_console+0x20e/0x216 [] init_netconsole+0x12f/0x185 [] _stext+0x3d/0x11d [] ? init_netconsole+0x0/0x185 [] ? create_proc_entry+0x6c/0x80 [] ? register_irq_proc+0x74/0x8d [] kernel_init+0x66/0xb4 [] ? kernel_init+0x0/0xb4 [] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x10 ======================= ---[ end trace 4eaa2a86a8e2da22 ]--- netconsole: network logging started initcall init_netconsole+0x0/0x185 returned 0 after 5916 msecs calling init_sd+0x0/0xdf and it's dead. This is extremely irritating. I'll see if I cen reproduce the bug I'm actually tring to find with E100=n.