From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 14:19:44 -0800 From: Pete Zaitcev Subject: Re: [2.6.24 REGRESSION] BUG: Soft lockup - with VFS Message-Id: <20080205141944.773140a1.zaitcev@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20080205140506.c6354490.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <6101e8c40801280031v1a860e90gfb3992ae5db37047@mail.gmail.com> <20080204213911.1bcbaf66.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1202219216.27371.24.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> <20080205104028.190192b1.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <6101e8c40802051115v12d3c02br24873ef1014dbea9@mail.gmail.com> <6101e8c40802051321l13268239m913fd90f56891054@mail.gmail.com> <6101e8c40802051348w2250e593x54f777bb771bd903@mail.gmail.com> <20080205140506.c6354490.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrew Morton Cc: Oliver Pinter , Linux Kernel , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, James Morris , linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, zaitcev@redhat.com List-ID: On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 14:05:06 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > Looks like you deadlocked in ub_request_fn(). I assume that you were using > ub.c in 2.6.23 and that it worked OK? If so, we broke it, possibly via > changes to the core block layer. > > I think ub.c is basically abandoned in favour of usb-storage. If so, > perhaps we should remove or disble ub.c? Actually I think it may be an argument for keeping ub, if ub exposes a bug in the __blk_end_request. I'll look at the head of the thread and see if Mr. Pinter has hit anything related to Mr. Ueda's work. -- Pete -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org