On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 03:15:03PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Oct 2017, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 3:33 AM, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> > >
> > > It looks like a compiler bug. The code of slob_units() try to read two
> > > bytes at 88001c4afffe. It's valid. But
On Wed, 18 Oct 2017, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 3:33 AM, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> >
> > It looks like a compiler bug. The code of slob_units() try to read two
> > bytes at 88001c4afffe. It's valid. But the compiler generates
> > wrong code that try to read four bytes.
> >
> >
On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 3:33 AM, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
>
> It looks like a compiler bug. The code of slob_units() try to read two
> bytes at 88001c4afffe. It's valid. But the compiler generates
> wrong code that try to read four bytes.
>
> static slobidx_t slob_units(slob_t *s)
> {
> if (s->uni
On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 09:50:04AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Oct 2017, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 12:01:20PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > > > Looking at the panic, the code in slob_free() was:
> > > >
> > > >0: e8 8d f7 ff ff callq 0xfff
On Tue, 17 Oct 2017, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 12:01:20PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > > Looking at the panic, the code in slob_free() was:
> > >
> > >0: e8 8d f7 ff ff callq 0xf792
> > >5: 48 ff 05 c9 8c 91 02incq 0x2918cc9(%rip)
On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 12:01:20PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> I failed to add the slab maintainers to CC on the last attempt. Trying
> again.
>
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 09:31:06PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 08:15:13PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> > >
> > >
On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 3:09 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 6:56 AM, Andrey Ryabinin
> wrote:
>>
>> This could be fixed by s/vmovdqa/vmovdqu change like bellow, but maybe the
>> right fix
>> would be to align the data properly?
>
> I suspect anything that has the SHA extensi
On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 6:56 AM, Andrey Ryabinin
> wrote:
>>
>> This could be fixed by s/vmovdqa/vmovdqu change like bellow, but maybe the
>> right fix
>> would be to align the data properly?
>
> I suspect anything that has the SHA extens
On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 6:56 AM, Andrey Ryabinin
wrote:
>
> This could be fixed by s/vmovdqa/vmovdqu change like bellow, but maybe the
> right fix
> would be to align the data properly?
I suspect anything that has the SHA extensions should also do
unaligned loads efficiently. The whole "aligned
On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 04:56:43PM +0300, Andrey Ryabinin wrote:
> On 10/13/2017 07:45 AM, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 12:05:04PM -0500, Christopher Lameter wrote:
> >> On Wed, 11 Oct 2017, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> >>
> >>> I failed to add the slab maintainers to CC on the last
On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 10:22:54AM -0500, Christopher Lameter wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Oct 2017, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
>
> > > Can you run SLUB with full debug? specify slub_debug on the commandline or
> > > set CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG_ON
> >
> > Oddly enough, with CONFIG_SLUB+slub_debug, I get the same cryp
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > Can you run SLUB with full debug? specify slub_debug on the commandline or
> > set CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG_ON
>
> Oddly enough, with CONFIG_SLUB+slub_debug, I get the same crypto panic I
> got with CONFIG_SLOB. The trapping instruction is:
>
> vmovdqa 0x
On 10/13/2017 07:45 AM, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 12:05:04PM -0500, Christopher Lameter wrote:
>> On Wed, 11 Oct 2017, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
>>
>>> I failed to add the slab maintainers to CC on the last attempt. Trying
>>> again.
>>
>>
>> Hmmm... Yea. SLOB is rarely used and
On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 12:05:04PM -0500, Christopher Lameter wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Oct 2017, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
>
> > I failed to add the slab maintainers to CC on the last attempt. Trying
> > again.
>
>
> Hmmm... Yea. SLOB is rarely used and tested. Good illustration of a simple
> allocator
On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 8:48 PM, Andrew Morton
wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 10:54:57 -0700 Linus Torvalds
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Christopher Lameter wrote:
>> > On Wed, 11 Oct 2017, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
>> >
>> >> I failed to add the slab maintainers to CC on the last at
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 10:54:57 -0700 Linus Torvalds
wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Christopher Lameter wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Oct 2017, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> >
> >> I failed to add the slab maintainers to CC on the last attempt. Trying
> >> again.
> >
> > Hmmm... Yea. SLOB is rarely
On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Christopher Lameter wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Oct 2017, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
>
>> I failed to add the slab maintainers to CC on the last attempt. Trying
>> again.
>
> Hmmm... Yea. SLOB is rarely used and tested. Good illustration of a simple
> allocator and the K&R me
On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Christopher Lameter wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Oct 2017, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
>
>> I failed to add the slab maintainers to CC on the last attempt. Trying
>> again.
>
> Hmmm... Yea. SLOB is rarely used and tested. Good illustration of a simple
> allocator and the K&R me
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> I failed to add the slab maintainers to CC on the last attempt. Trying
> again.
Hmmm... Yea. SLOB is rarely used and tested. Good illustration of a simple
allocator and the K&R mechanism that was used in the early kernels.
> > Adding the slub mainta
I failed to add the slab maintainers to CC on the last attempt. Trying
again.
On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 09:31:06PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 08:15:13PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> >
> > FYI, we noticed the following commit (built with gcc-4.8):
> >
> > commit: 8
On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 08:15:13PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>
> FYI, we noticed the following commit (built with gcc-4.8):
>
> commit: 81d387190039c14edac8de2b3ec789beb899afd9 ("x86/kconfig: Consolidate
> unwinders into multiple choice selection")
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kerne
FYI, we noticed the following commit (built with gcc-4.8):
commit: 81d387190039c14edac8de2b3ec789beb899afd9 ("x86/kconfig: Consolidate
unwinders into multiple choice selection")
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
in testcase: boot
on test machine: qemu-syste
22 matches
Mail list logo
