On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 4:33 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]> wrote: > > Unresolved regressions > ---------------------- > > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16353 > Subject : 2.6.35 regression > Submitter : Zeev Tarantov <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-07-05 13:04 (4 days old) > Message-ID : <[email protected]> > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127836002702522&w=2
This is a gcc-4.5 issue. Whether it's also something that we should change in the kernel is unclear, but at least as of now, the rule is that you cannot compile the kernel with gcc-4.5. No idea whether the compiler is just entirely broken, or whether it's just that it triggers something iffy by being overly clever. > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16346 > Subject : 2.6.35-rc3-git8 - include/linux/fdtable.h:88 invoked > rcu_dereference_check() without protection! > Submitter : Miles Lane <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-07-04 22:04 (5 days old) > Message-ID : > <[email protected]> > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127828107815930&w=2 I'm not entirely sure if these RCU proving things should count as regressions. Sure, the option to enable RCU proving is new, but the things it reports about generally are not new - and they are usually not even bugs in the sense that they necessarily cause any real problems. That particular one is in the single-thread optimizated case for fget_light, ie if (likely((atomic_read(&files->count) == 1))) { file = fcheck_files(files, fd); where I think it should be entirely safe in all ways without any locking. So I think it's a false positive too. > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16334 > Subject : reiserfs locking (v2) > Submitter : Sergey Senozhatsky <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-07-02 9:34 (7 days old) > Message-ID : <[email protected]> > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127806306303590&w=2 Frederic? Al? I assume this is some late fallout from the BKL removal ages ago.. It's the old filldir-vs-mmap crud, but normally it should be impossible to trigger because the inode for a directory should never be mmap'able, so we should never have the same i_mutex lock used for both mmap and for filldir protection. We saw some of that oddity long ago, I wonder if it's lockdep being confused about some inodes. > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16333 > Subject : iwl3945: HARDWARE GONE?? > Submitter : Priit Laes <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-07-02 16:02 (7 days old) > Message-ID : <1278086575.2889.8.ca...@chi> > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127808659705983&w=2 This either got fixed, or will be practically impossible to debug. The reporter ends up being unable to reproduce the issue. > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16332 > Subject : Kernel crashes in tty code (tty_open) > Submitter : [email protected] > Date : 2010-07-02 3:34 (7 days old) > Message-ID : <[email protected]> > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127804167511930&w=2 This seems to be due to CONFIG_MRST (Moorestown). > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16330 > Subject : Dynamic Debug broken on 2.6.35-rc3? > Submitter : Thomas Renninger <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-07-01 15:44 (8 days old) > Message-ID : <[email protected]> > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127799907218877&w=2 There's a suggested patch in http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127862524404291&w=2 but no reply to it yet. > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16329 > Subject : 2.6.35-rc3: Load average climbing to 3+ with no apparent > reason: CPU 98% idle, with hardly no I/O > Submitter : Török Edwin <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-07-01 7:40 (8 days old) > Message-ID : <20100701104022.40441...@debian> > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127797005030536&w=2 This seems to be partly a confusion about what "load average" is. It's not a CPU load, it's a system load average, and disk-wait processes count towards it. He has some problem with his CD-ROM, and it sounds like it might be hardware on the verge of going bad. > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16324 > Subject : Oops while running fs_racer test on a POWER6 box against > latest git > Submitter : divya <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-06-30 11:34 (9 days old) > Message-ID : <[email protected]> > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127789697303061&w=2 I wonder if this is the writeback problem. That POWER crash dump is unreadable, so it's hard to tell, but the load in question makes that at least likely. If so, it should hopefully be fixed in today's git (commit 83ba7b071f30f7c01f72518ad72d5cd203c27502 and friends). > Bug-entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16323 > Subject : 2.6.35-rc3-git4 - kernel/sched.c:616 invoked > rcu_dereference_check() without protection! > Submitter : Miles Lane <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-07-01 12:21 (8 days old) > Message-ID : > <[email protected]> > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127798693125541&w=2 See earlier about these being marked as regressions, but it should be fixed by commit dc61b1d6 ("sched: Fix PROVE_RCU vs cpu_cgroup"). > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16322 > Subject : WARNING: at /arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h:1005 > read_measured_perf_ctrs+0x5a/0x70() > Submitter : boris64 <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-07-01 13:54 (8 days old) > Handled-By : H. Peter Anvin <[email protected]> Magic. Strange and dark magic. > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16311 > Subject : [REGRESSION][SUSPEND] 2.6.35-rcX won't suspend Lenovo W500 > laptop > Submitter : Shawn Starr <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-06-28 0:45 (11 days old) > Message-ID : <[email protected]> > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127768633705286&w=2 I think this might be usefully bisected. Shawn? > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16309 > Subject : 2.6.35-rc3 oops trying to suspend. > Submitter : Andrew Hendry <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-06-27 12:40 (12 days old) > Message-ID : > <[email protected]> > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127764249926781&w=2 I'm pretty sure this was fixed by Nick in commit 57439f878afa ("fs: fix superblock iteration race"). > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16307 > Subject : i915 in kernel 2.6.35-rc3, high number of wakeups > Submitter : Enrico Bandiello <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-06-26 16:57 (13 days old) > Message-ID : <[email protected]> > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127757403404259&w=2 I don't think anybody noticed this one. Jesse? > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16304 > Subject : i915 - high number of wakeups > Submitter : Enrico Bandiello <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-06-27 09:52 (12 days old) Duplicate of that 16307 one. > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16284 > Subject : Hitting WARN_ON in hw_breakpoint code > Submitter : Paul Mackerras <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-06-23 12:57 (16 days old) > Message-ID : <[email protected]> > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127729789113432&w=2 This has "I have a fix, will post it very soon." in the thread from Frederic, but I'm not seeing anything else. Frederic? > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16265 > Subject : Why is kslowd accumulating so much CPU time? > Submitter : Theodore Ts'o <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-06-09 18:36 (30 days old) > First-Bad-Commit: > http://git.kernel.org/linus/fbf81762e385d3d45acad057b654d56972acf58c > Message-ID : <[email protected]> > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127610857819033&w=4 Dave, Jesse? > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16234 > Subject : [2.6.35-rc3] reboot mutex 'bug'... > Submitter : Daniel J Blueman <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-06-14 15:16 (25 days old) > Message-ID : > <[email protected]> > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127652861118933&w=2 Ok, this is definitely harmless. Whether we should silence the warning somehow is a separate question. > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16230 > Subject : inconsistent IN-HARDIRQ-W -> HARDIRQ-ON-W usage: fasync, > 2.6.35-rc3 > Submitter : Dominik Brodowski <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-06-13 9:53 (26 days old) > Message-ID : <[email protected]> > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127642282208277&w=2 Fixed by commit f4985dc714d7. > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16228 > Subject : BUG/boot failure on Dell Precision T3500 > (pci/ahci_stop_engine) > Submitter : Brian Bloniarz <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-06-16 17:57 (23 days old) > Handled-By : Bjorn Helgaas <[email protected]> This has a butt-ugly suggested patch that certainly won't be applied. I saw the thread, but lost sight of it. Jesse, did that end up with some resolution? > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16221 > Subject : 2.6.35-rc2-git5 -- [drm:drm_mode_getfb] *ERROR* invalid > framebuffer id > Submitter : Miles Lane <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-06-11 20:31 (28 days old) > Message-ID : > <[email protected]> > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127628828119623&w=2 I dunno. Old, and apparently seen by two people. Dave? Might be helped by bisection. > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16205 > Subject : acpi: freeing invalid memtype bf799000-bf79a000 > Submitter : Marcin Slusarz <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-06-09 20:09 (30 days old) > Message-ID : <[email protected]> > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127611427029914&w=2 > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127688398513862&w=2 This should be fixed by commit b945d6b2554d ("rbtree: Undo augmented trees performance damage and regression"). > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16199 > Subject : 2.6.35-rc2-git1 - include/linux/cgroup.h:534 invoked > rcu_dereference_check() without protection! > Submitter : Miles Lane <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-06-07 18:14 (32 days old) > Message-ID : > <[email protected]> > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127593447812015&w=2 Another RCU proving thing. And this one looks the same as the 16323 one above, and fixed by the same commit as that one. > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16197 > Subject : [BUG on 2.6.35-rc2] sysfs: cannot create duplicate filename > '/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:11.0/0000:02:03.0/slot' > Submitter : Ryan Wang <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-06-07 0:23 (32 days old) > Message-ID : > <[email protected]> > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127587022219378&w=2 These should all be gone. See commit 3be434f0244ee by Jesse ('Revert "PCI: create function symlinks in /sys/bus/pci/slots/N/"'). > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16187 > Subject : Carrier detection failed in dhcpcd when link is up > Submitter : Christian Casteyde <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-06-12 15:15 (27 days old) > First-Bad-Commit: > http://git.kernel.org/linus/10708f37ae729baba9b67bd134c3720709d4ae62 > Handled-By : Andrew Morton <[email protected]> David? This bisects to a networking commit. Doesn't look sensible, but what do I know? > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16184 > Subject : Container, X86-64, i386, iptables rule > Submitter : Jean-Marc Pigeon <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-06-12 04:17 (27 days old) > Handled-By : Patrick McHardy <[email protected]> Patrick, Davem? Ping? > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16179 > Subject : 2.6.35-rc2 completely hosed on intel gfx? > Submitter : Norbert Preining <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-06-06 11:55 (33 days old) > Message-ID : <[email protected]> > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127582534931581&w=2 Hmm. That one is the vt.c bug coupled with another problem, which in turn got opened as a separate bugzilla entry: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16252 which in turn then got closed. I dunno. > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16175 > Subject : 2.6.35-rc1 system oom, many processes killed but memory not > free > Submitter : andrew hendry <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-06-05 0:46 (34 days old) > Message-ID : > <[email protected]> > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127569877714937&w=2 Not a regression or a kernel bug at all. See the thread. Big ramdisk filled up all of memory when it was filled by the builds. > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16145 > Subject : Unable to boot unless "notsc" or "clocksource=hpet", or > acpi_pad disabling the TSC > Submitter : Tom Gundersen <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-06-07 13:11 (32 days old) > Handled-By : Venkatesh Pallipadi <[email protected]> > Len Brown <[email protected]> This is not a regression. See the full bugzilla details. The same problem persists at least back to 2.6.30 with his config. So it's somehow specific to his particular config use that requires "notsc" to boot. > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16122 > Subject : 2.6.35-rc1: WARNING at fs/fs-writeback.c:1142 > __mark_inode_dirty+0x103/0x170 > Submitter : Larry Finger <[email protected]> > Date : 2010-06-04 13:18 (35 days old) > Handled-By : Jens Axboe <[email protected]> This looks like a duplicate of that 16312 bugzilla entry. Jens, has this been resolved? Linus ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone? Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
