Re: 2.6.20.3: kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:597 try#2

2007-03-19 Thread Andreas Steinmetz
Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 00:25:02 +0100 > Andreas Steinmetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Mike Christie wrote: >>> Mike Christie wrote: James Bottomley wrote: > On Mon, 2007-03-19 at 12:49 -0500, Mike Christie wrote: >>> I can't even say if the tapes are written co

Re: 2.6.20.3: kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:597 try#2

2007-03-19 Thread Andrew Morton
On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 00:25:02 +0100 Andreas Steinmetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Mike Christie wrote: > > Mike Christie wrote: > >> James Bottomley wrote: > >>> On Mon, 2007-03-19 at 12:49 -0500, Mike Christie wrote: > > I can't even say if the tapes are written correctly as I can't read them

Re: 2.6.20.3: kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:597 try#2

2007-03-19 Thread Gene Heskett
On Monday 19 March 2007, James Bottomley wrote: >On Mon, 2007-03-19 at 17:47 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: >> James, could this also be the cause of a tar based backup going crazy >> and thinking all data is new under any 2.6.21-rc* kernel I've tested >> so far with amanda, which in my case uses tar?

Re: 2.6.20.3: kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:597 try#2

2007-03-19 Thread Andreas Steinmetz
Mike Christie wrote: > James Bottomley wrote: >> On Mon, 2007-03-19 at 12:49 -0500, Mike Christie wrote: I can't even say if the tapes are written correctly as I can't read them (one does not reboot production machines back to 2.4.x just to try to read a backup tape - I don't have 2.

Re: 2.6.20.3: kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:597 try#2

2007-03-19 Thread Andreas Steinmetz
Mike Christie wrote: > Mike Christie wrote: >> James Bottomley wrote: >>> On Mon, 2007-03-19 at 12:49 -0500, Mike Christie wrote: > I can't even say if the tapes are written correctly as I can't read them > (one does not reboot production machines back to 2.4.x just to try to > read a b

Re: 2.6.20.3: kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:597 try#2

2007-03-19 Thread James Bottomley
On Mon, 2007-03-19 at 17:47 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: > James, could this also be the cause of a tar based backup going crazy and > thinking all data is new under any 2.6.21-rc* kernel I've tested so far > with amanda, which in my case uses tar? I've tried the fedora patched > tar-1.15-1, and

Re: 2.6.20.3: kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:597 try#2

2007-03-19 Thread Gene Heskett
On Monday 19 March 2007, James Bottomley wrote: >On Mon, 2007-03-19 at 12:49 -0500, Mike Christie wrote: >> > I can't even say if the tapes are written correctly as I can't read >> > them (one does not reboot production machines back to 2.4.x just to >> > try to read a backup tape - I don't have 2.

Re: 2.6.20.3: kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:597 try#2

2007-03-19 Thread Mike Christie
Mike Christie wrote: > James Bottomley wrote: >> On Mon, 2007-03-19 at 12:49 -0500, Mike Christie wrote: I can't even say if the tapes are written correctly as I can't read them (one does not reboot production machines back to 2.4.x just to try to read a backup tape - I don't have 2.

Re: 2.6.20.3: kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:597 try#2

2007-03-19 Thread Mike Christie
James Bottomley wrote: > On Mon, 2007-03-19 at 12:49 -0500, Mike Christie wrote: >>> I can't even say if the tapes are written correctly as I can't read them >>> (one does not reboot production machines back to 2.4.x just to try to >>> read a backup tape - I don't have 2.6.x older than 2.6.20 on th

Re: 2.6.20.3: kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:597 try#2

2007-03-19 Thread James Bottomley
On Mon, 2007-03-19 at 12:49 -0500, Mike Christie wrote: > > I can't even say if the tapes are written correctly as I can't read them > > (one does not reboot production machines back to 2.4.x just to try to > > read a backup tape - I don't have 2.6.x older than 2.6.20 on these > > machines). > > C

Re: 2.6.20.3: kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:597 try#2

2007-03-19 Thread Mike Christie
Andreas Steinmetz wrote: > As posted to lkml and linux-scsi on 2007-03-15 without reply, see > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=117395128412313&w=2 for original post: > > It is not so nice when one can write backup tapes but the tapes cannot > be read. I don't know if memory management or the st

Re: 2.6.20.3: kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:597 try#2

2007-03-19 Thread Pekka Enberg
On 3/19/07, Pekka Enberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You can see that mempool_free is passing a NULL pointer to kmem_cache_free() which doesn't handle it properly. The NULL pointer comes from bio_free() where ->bi_io_vec is NULL because nr_iovecs passed to bio_alloc_bioset() was zero. The questi

Re: 2.6.20.3: kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:597 try#2

2007-03-19 Thread Pekka Enberg
On 3/19/07, Pekka Enberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: EIP is at kmem_cache_free+0x29/0x5a eax: c180 ebx: f0ae12c0 ecx: c18f73c0 edx: c180 esi: c1919de0 edi: ebp: 1000 esp: f1fe7e14 ds: 007b es: 007b ss: 0068 But somehow eax and edx have the same value 0xc18

Re: 2.6.20.3: kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:597 try#2

2007-03-19 Thread Pekka Enberg
On 3/19/07, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: BUG_ON(!PageSlab(page)); that's seriously screwed up. Do you have CONFIG_DEBUG_SLAB enabled? If not, please enable it and retest. This is scary. Looking at disassembly of the OOPS: Disassembly of section .text: <.text>:

Re: 2.6.20.3: kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:597 try#2

2007-03-18 Thread Andrew Morton
On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 01:34:22 +0100 Andreas Steinmetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As posted to lkml and linux-scsi on 2007-03-15 without reply, see > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=117395128412313&w=2 for original post: Repeatable oops in our most recently released kernel, nobody bothers to r

2.6.20.3: kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:597 try#2

2007-03-18 Thread Andreas Steinmetz
As posted to lkml and linux-scsi on 2007-03-15 without reply, see http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=117395128412313&w=2 for original post: It is not so nice when one can write backup tapes but the tapes cannot be read. I don't know if memory management or the st driver is the culprit, but this is