From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ie0-f170.google.com (mail-ie0-f170.google.com [209.85.223.170]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 645166B003A for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 13:06:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-ie0-f170.google.com with SMTP id rd18so694503iec.1 for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 10:06:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from qmta02.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (qmta02.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net. [2001:558:fe2d:43:76:96:30:24]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id pe7si20119426icc.42.2014.03.25.10.06.39 for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 10:06:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 12:06:36 -0500 (CDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: mm: slub: gpf in deactivate_slab In-Reply-To: <20140325165247.GA7519@dhcp22.suse.cz> Message-ID: References: <53208A87.2040907@oracle.com> <5331A6C3.2000303@oracle.com> <20140325165247.GA7519@dhcp22.suse.cz> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Michal Hocko Cc: Sasha Levin , Pekka Enberg , Matt Mackall , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , LKML On Tue, 25 Mar 2014, Michal Hocko wrote: > You are right. The function even does VM_BUG_ON(!irqs_disabled())... > Unfortunatelly we do not seem to have an _irq alternative of the bit > spinlock. > Not sure what to do about it. Christoph? > > Btw. it seems to go way back to 3.1 (1d07171c5e58e). Well there is a preempt_enable() (bit_spin_lock) and a preempt_disable() bit_spin_unlock() within a piece of code where irqs are disabled. Is that a problem? Has been there for a long time. -- 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