On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 02:43:12PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> Hi Christoph and Al Viro,
>
> Linux next 20190904 boot PASS now.
> May i know which patch fixed this problem ?
commit 84a2bd39405ffd5fa6d6d77e408c5b9210da98de
Author: Al Viro
Date: Tue Jul 16 21:20:17 2019 -0400
On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 06:56:10PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 08:39:30AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> > > There's much nastier situation than "new upstream kernel released,
> > > need to rebuild" - it's bisect in mainline trying to locate something...
> >
> > I really
Hi Christoph and Al Viro,
Linux next 20190904 boot PASS now.
May i know which patch fixed this problem ?
- Naresh
On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 06:56:10PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 08:39:30AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> > > There's much nastier situation than "new upstream kernel released,
> > > need to rebuild" - it's bisect in mainline trying to locate something...
> >
> > I really
On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 06:50:24AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 02:48:32PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > Not sure what would be the best way to do it... I don't mind breaking
> > the out-of-tree modules, whatever their license is; what I would rather
> > avoid is _quiet_
On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 08:39:30AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > There's much nastier situation than "new upstream kernel released,
> > need to rebuild" - it's bisect in mainline trying to locate something...
>
> I really don't get the point. And it's not like we've card about
> this
On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 02:53:54PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 06:50:24AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 02:48:32PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > > Not sure what would be the best way to do it... I don't mind breaking
> > > the out-of-tree modules,
On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 06:50:24AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 02:48:32PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > Not sure what would be the best way to do it... I don't mind breaking
> > the out-of-tree modules, whatever their license is; what I would rather
> > avoid is _quiet_
Hi
On Tue, 3 Sep 2019 at 19:01, Al Viro wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 01:37:19PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 12:21:36AM -0400, Qian Cai wrote:
> > > The linux-next commit "fs/namei.c: keep track of nd->root refcount
> > > status” [1] causes boot panic on all
> > >
On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 02:48:32PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> Not sure what would be the best way to do it... I don't mind breaking
> the out-of-tree modules, whatever their license is; what I would rather
> avoid is _quiet_ breaking of such.
Any out of tree module running against an upstream
On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 06:04:56AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 01:37:19PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 12:21:36AM -0400, Qian Cai wrote:
> > > The linux-next commit "fs/namei.c: keep track of nd->root refcount
> > > status” [1] causes boot panic
On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 01:37:19PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 12:21:36AM -0400, Qian Cai wrote:
> > The linux-next commit "fs/namei.c: keep track of nd->root refcount status”
> > [1] causes boot panic on all
> > architectures here on today’s linux-next (0902). Reverted it
On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 01:37:19PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 12:21:36AM -0400, Qian Cai wrote:
> > The linux-next commit "fs/namei.c: keep track of nd->root refcount status”
> > [1] causes boot panic on all
> > architectures here on today’s linux-next (0902). Reverted it
On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 12:21:36AM -0400, Qian Cai wrote:
> The linux-next commit "fs/namei.c: keep track of nd->root refcount status”
> [1] causes boot panic on all
> architectures here on today’s linux-next (0902). Reverted it will fix the
> issue.
OK, I see what's going on. Incremental to
> On 03-Sep-2019, at 1:43 PM, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
>
> On Tue, 3 Sep 2019 at 09:51, Qian Cai wrote:
>>
>> The linux-next commit "fs/namei.c: keep track of nd->root refcount status”
>> [1] causes boot panic on all
>> architectures here on today’s linux-next (0902). Reverted it will fix the
On Tue, 3 Sep 2019 at 09:51, Qian Cai wrote:
>
> The linux-next commit "fs/namei.c: keep track of nd->root refcount status”
> [1] causes boot panic on all
> architectures here on today’s linux-next (0902). Reverted it will fix the
> issue.
I have same problem and reverting this patch fixed the
FYI: this is a slightly different call-trace. I believe this also show a memory
corruption...
[ 17.848975] Run /init as init process
Loading, please wait...
starting version 239
[ 18.045913] BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: 8884bb8f4b98
[ 18.046012] #PF: supervisor write
> From: Dexuan-Linux Cui
> Sent: Monday, September 2, 2019 10:22 PM
> To: Qian Cai
> Cc: Al Viro ; linux-fsde...@vger.kernel.org; LKML
> ; Dexuan Cui ; Lili Deng
> (Wicresoft North America Ltd)
> Subject: Re: "fs/namei.c: keep track of nd->root refcount status&quo
On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 9:22 PM Qian Cai wrote:
>
> The linux-next commit "fs/namei.c: keep track of nd->root refcount status”
> [1] causes boot panic on all
> architectures here on today’s linux-next (0902). Reverted it will fix the
> issue.
I believe I'm seeing the same issue with
19 matches
Mail list logo
