On Wed, 2013-08-07 at 22:01 +0100, Nix wrote:
> On 7 Aug 2013, Trond Myklebust said:
>
> > On Wed, 2013-08-07 at 11:18 +0100, Nix wrote:
> >> On 6 Aug 2013, Trond Myklebust verbalised:
> >> > True. How about something like the following instead. Note the change to
> >> > the original patch...
> >>
On 7 Aug 2013, Trond Myklebust said:
> On Wed, 2013-08-07 at 11:18 +0100, Nix wrote:
>> On 6 Aug 2013, Trond Myklebust verbalised:
>> > True. How about something like the following instead. Note the change to
>> > the original patch...
>>
>> Well, with those applied I could reboot without a panic
On Wed, 2013-08-07 at 11:18 +0100, Nix wrote:
> On 6 Aug 2013, Trond Myklebust verbalised:
> > True. How about something like the following instead. Note the change to
> > the original patch...
>
> Well, with those applied I could reboot without a panic for the first
> time since 3.8.x: looking go
On 6 Aug 2013, Trond Myklebust verbalised:
> True. How about something like the following instead. Note the change to
> the original patch...
Well, with those applied I could reboot without a panic for the first
time since 3.8.x: looking good. I'll give it a reboot or two with a
system that's not
On 5 Aug 2013, Trond Myklebust uttered the following:
> Yes. This scheme will only work if we make sure that host->h_rpcclnt is
> initialised at mount time. Here is a v2 patch that should do the right
> thing.
Confirmed, that fixes it! I'll try your shutdown crash fix next.
--
NULL && (void)
--
On Tue, 6 Aug 2013 02:21:35 +
"Myklebust, Trond" wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-08-05 at 14:33 -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 18:18:03 +
> > "Myklebust, Trond" wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 2013-08-05 at 13:37 -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 16:15:01 +
> > >
On Mon, 2013-08-05 at 14:33 -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 18:18:03 +
> "Myklebust, Trond" wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2013-08-05 at 13:37 -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > > On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 16:15:01 +
> > > "Myklebust, Trond" wrote:
> > >
> > > > From 3c50ba80105464a28d456d9a1e
On Mon, 2013-08-05 at 19:33 +0100, Nix wrote:
> On 5 Aug 2013, Trond Myklebust told this:
> > Does the attached patch fix the problem?
>
> > From 3c50ba80105464a28d456d9a1e0f1d81d4af92a8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: Trond Myklebust
> > Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 12:06:12 -0400
> > Subject: [PATC
On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 18:18:03 +
"Myklebust, Trond" wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-08-05 at 13:37 -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 16:15:01 +
> > "Myklebust, Trond" wrote:
> >
> > > From 3c50ba80105464a28d456d9a1e0f1d81d4af92a8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > > From: Trond Myklebust
>
On 5 Aug 2013, Trond Myklebust told this:
> Does the attached patch fix the problem?
> From 3c50ba80105464a28d456d9a1e0f1d81d4af92a8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Trond Myklebust
> Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 12:06:12 -0400
> Subject: [PATCH] LOCKD: Don't call utsname()->nodename from
> nlmclnt_set
On Mon, 2013-08-05 at 13:37 -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 16:15:01 +
> "Myklebust, Trond" wrote:
>
> > From 3c50ba80105464a28d456d9a1e0f1d81d4af92a8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: Trond Myklebust
> > Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 12:06:12 -0400
> > Subject: [PATCH] LOCKD: Don't
On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 16:15:01 +
"Myklebust, Trond" wrote:
> From 3c50ba80105464a28d456d9a1e0f1d81d4af92a8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Trond Myklebust
> Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 12:06:12 -0400
> Subject: [PATCH] LOCKD: Don't call utsname()->nodename from
> nlmclnt_setlockargs
> MIME-Version:
On Mon, 05 Aug 2013 16:50:37 +0100
Nix wrote:
> On 5 Aug 2013, Jeff Layton said:
>
> > On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 11:04:27 -0400
> > Jeff Layton wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 05 Aug 2013 15:48:01 +0100
> >> Nix wrote:
> >>
> >> > On 5 Aug 2013, Jeff Layton stated:
> >> >
> >> > > On Sun, 04 Aug 2013 16:40
On Mon, 2013-08-05 at 16:50 +0100, Nix wrote:
> On 5 Aug 2013, Jeff Layton said:
>
> > On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 11:04:27 -0400
> > Jeff Layton wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 05 Aug 2013 15:48:01 +0100
> >> Nix wrote:
> >>
> >> > On 5 Aug 2013, Jeff Layton stated:
> >> >
> >> > > On Sun, 04 Aug 2013 16:40:5
On 5 Aug 2013, Jeff Layton said:
> On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 11:04:27 -0400
> Jeff Layton wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 05 Aug 2013 15:48:01 +0100
>> Nix wrote:
>>
>> > On 5 Aug 2013, Jeff Layton stated:
>> >
>> > > On Sun, 04 Aug 2013 16:40:58 +0100
>> > > Nix wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> I just got this panic on 3
On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 11:04:27 -0400
Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Aug 2013 15:48:01 +0100
> Nix wrote:
>
> > On 5 Aug 2013, Jeff Layton stated:
> >
> > > On Sun, 04 Aug 2013 16:40:58 +0100
> > > Nix wrote:
> > >
> > >> I just got this panic on 3.10.4, in the middle of a large parallel
> > >>
On Mon, 05 Aug 2013 15:48:01 +0100
Nix wrote:
> On 5 Aug 2013, Jeff Layton stated:
>
> > On Sun, 04 Aug 2013 16:40:58 +0100
> > Nix wrote:
> >
> >> I just got this panic on 3.10.4, in the middle of a large parallel
> >> compilation (of Chromium, as it happens) over NFSv3:
> >>
> >> [16364.5275
On 5 Aug 2013, Jeff Layton stated:
> On Sun, 04 Aug 2013 16:40:58 +0100
> Nix wrote:
>
>> I just got this panic on 3.10.4, in the middle of a large parallel
>> compilation (of Chromium, as it happens) over NFSv3:
>>
>> [16364.527516] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at
>> 0
On Sun, 04 Aug 2013 16:40:58 +0100
Nix wrote:
> I just got this panic on 3.10.4, in the middle of a large parallel
> compilation (of Chromium, as it happens) over NFSv3:
>
> [16364.527516] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at
> 0008
> [16364.527571] IP: [] nlmcln
I just got this panic on 3.10.4, in the middle of a large parallel
compilation (of Chromium, as it happens) over NFSv3:
[16364.527516] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at
0008
[16364.527571] IP: [] nlmclnt_setlockargs+0x55/0xcf
[16364.527611] PGD 0
[16364.527626]
20 matches
Mail list logo
