On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 20:07:42 -0400 Rik van Riel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 17:29:26 -0400 > Rik van Riel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 22:48:51 +0200 > > Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > I'm getting a process stuck in pthread_rwlock_wrlock(), even > > > > > though it looks like the lock is not held by anybody. > > > > > > > > > > I think the last -mm was OK. Any ideas? > > > > > > > > > > If not, I'll go searching for the offending patch. > > > > > > > > I wonder if that's the same bug that's breaking autofs for me. > > > > > > Probably. > > > > > > > Oct 22 14:39:01 kenny automount[2299]: cache_readlock: mapent > > > > cache rwlock lock failed > > > > Oct 22 14:39:01 kenny automount[2299]: unexpected pthreads error: > > > > 11 at 65 in cache.c > > > > > > > > I'm bisecting 2.6.23-mm1 today to find the problem patch, with > > > > some luck I'll have it this afternoon. > > > > > > > > With the series applied up to > > > > whitespace-fixes-task-exit-handling.patch things work. > > > > > > > > It breaks before > > > > kswapd-should-only-wait-on-io-if-there-is-io.patch > > > > > > > > That leaves only about 60-80 patches to look at :) > > > > > > OK, the first patch that breaks something for me is: > > > > > > pid-namespaces-move-alloc_pid-lower-in-copy_process.patch > > > > Confirmed. That same patch is the point where the bisect > > here starts breaking autofs. > > Oww man. Getting into heisenbug territory now :( > > I bisected down to the point where I had these two patches between > good and bad: > > # GOOD > pid-namespaces-move-alloc_pid-lower-in-copy_process.patch > pid-namespaces-make-proc-have-multiple-superblocks-one-for-each-namespace.patch > # BAD > > Applying them one by one and rebuilding the kernel after each one > gave me a working kernel, though! > > Bisecting them from the top (quilt pop) resulted in a broken kernel, > bisecting from the bottom (quilt push) results in a working one. > > I have no idea what is going on any more... > I guess we can debug it in the old-fashioned ways. The first of which is to palm the problem off on Pavel ;) I don't recall seeing a simple step-by-step way by which others can reproduce this? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/