From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57633) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YLRkR-0001vQ-7Z for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 02:30:12 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YLRkM-00034K-8U for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 02:30:11 -0500 Received: from mail-wi0-x22d.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c05::22d]:36861) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YLRkM-00032b-2c for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 02:30:06 -0500 Received: by mail-wi0-f173.google.com with SMTP id bs8so17894596wib.0 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 23:30:05 -0800 (PST) Sender: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <54DB04F8.3080405@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 08:30:00 +0100 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1423572769-4238-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> <20150211051302.3809.50882@loki> In-Reply-To: <20150211051302.3809.50882@loki> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] memory: unregister AddressSpace MemoryListener within BQL List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Michael Roth , qemu-devel On 11/02/2015 06:13, Michael Roth wrote: > (gdb) print node > $1 = (struct rcu_head *) 0x11189a68 > (gdb) print node->func > $2 = (RCUCBFunc *) 0x0 > (gdb) print node->next > $3 = (struct rcu_head *) 0x3fff9800d4f0 > > I've seen it on both x86 and pseries (with spapr hotplug patches applied), and > have only seen it occur at this spot. > > AFAICT node->func is only set via 1 of: > > call_rcu(old_view, flatview_unref, rcu); > call_rcu(as, do_address_space_destroy, rcu); > > so it shouldn't ever be NULL... and there's a wmb after node->func is set, > prior to the node being made available to the RCU thread via enqueue(), so > that doesn't seem to be the issue. > > I think the node in this case is a FlatView*, if that helps narrow it down: > > (gdb) print ((AddressSpace *)(0x3fff9800d4f0))->name > $5 = 0x100000000
This is node->next, not node. The weird address looks almost like node == &dummy. I'll try to reproduce. Paolo