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.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-21 19:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ 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]
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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox