On 09/23/2010 11:48 PM, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> On Sep 24, 2010, at 12:34 AM, Kyle McMartin
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 11:24:54PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
>>> I dunno. at this point, I'm torn over whether to keep pushing in
>>> this direction. The spec is already getting ugly with all th
2010/9/24 Chuck Ebbert :
> On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 13:06:25 +0200
> Michał Piotrowski wrote:
>
>> RIP: 0010:[] []
>> cfq_free_io_context+0x18/0x34
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577968
Thanks. If I find a repeatable path to reproduce the error I'll
describe it in bugzilla thread.
R
2010/9/24 Kyle McMartin :
> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 02:50:35PM +0200, Micha? Piotrowski wrote:
>> > I looked at that on Monday, but haven't found it yet.
>>
>> So it is a known problem. Good to know.
>>
>
> Aside from you reporting it, no, I haven't seen anything aside from some
> mails from Alexey
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 13:06:25 +0200
Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> RIP: 0010:[] []
> cfq_free_io_context+0x18/0x34
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577968
___
kernel mailing list
kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/ma
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 01:06:25PM +0200, Micha? Piotrowski wrote:
> RSP: 0018:88000d909d90 EFLAGS: 00010202
> RAX: 0001075550e9 RBX: 6b6b6b6b6b6b6b6b RCX:
Oh, poop, this is a use-after-free somewhere, and cfq is likely not the
culprit...
_
On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 09:03:00AM -0400, Kyle McMartin wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 02:50:35PM +0200, Micha? Piotrowski wrote:
> > > I looked at that on Monday, but haven't found it yet.
> >
> > So it is a known problem. Good to know.
> >
>
> Aside from you reporting it, no, I haven't seen
On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 02:50:35PM +0200, Micha? Piotrowski wrote:
> > I looked at that on Monday, but haven't found it yet.
>
> So it is a known problem. Good to know.
>
Aside from you reporting it, no, I haven't seen anything aside from some
mails from Alexey in 2008.
--Kyle
_
2010/9/24 Kyle McMartin :
> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 08:58:59AM +0200, Micha? Piotrowski wrote:
>> 2010/9/23 Chris Wright :
>> > * Roland McGrath (rol...@redhat.com) wrote:
>> >> That is fixed upstream in commit f362b73244fb16ea4ae127ced1467dd8adaa7733.
>> >> If that's not already queued for 2.6.35-
On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 08:58:59AM +0200, Micha? Piotrowski wrote:
> 2010/9/23 Chris Wright :
> > * Roland McGrath (rol...@redhat.com) wrote:
> >> That is fixed upstream in commit f362b73244fb16ea4ae127ced1467dd8adaa7733.
> >> If that's not already queued for 2.6.35-stable, then it probably should
