xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: 3.14-rc2 XFS backtrace because irqs_disabled.

To: Richard Weinberger <richard@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: 3.14-rc2 XFS backtrace because irqs_disabled.
From: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 15:20:28 +0000
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxx>, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <52FE1A3A.9090301@xxxxxx>
References: <20140212054043.GB13997@dastard> <CA+55aFxy2t7bnCUc-DhhxYxsZ0+GwL9GuQXRYtE_VzqZusmB9A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20140212113928.GO18016@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <CA+55aFywwx0Q8xK2GJiRJ+FV7PQEKoBRxDUxW4052FVyd5XOpg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20140212211421.GP18016@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <CA+55aFyobyUNFo=3rpdbxTqgV7OQetCKbCfwEEbgxUcT-1+30w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20140212214411.GQ18016@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20140213205146.GS18016@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20140214132503.GA23265@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <52FE1A3A.9090301@xxxxxx>
Sender: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 02:29:30PM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Am 14.02.2014 14:25, schrieb Christoph Hellwig:
> > On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 08:51:46PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> >> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 09:44:11PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> >>
> >>> I'll try to put something along those lines together, if you or Oleg don't
> >>> do it first.
> >>
> >> OK, having looked at that stuff...
> >>
> >> 1) things become much more compact if we finish conversion to get_signal()
> >> first.
> > 
> > I have vague memories that Richard sent out a series to convert over all
> > architectures a while ago.  Hopefully he has better memory than I do.
> 
> Yeah. Sending v2 of that series is on my overflowing TODO list. :-\
> I think this is a good reason for me to start working on that series again.
> Stay tuned.

Would be great.   I have several done here, but I'll be glad to replace them
with something tested...

BTW, Oleg, could you explain why does PTRACE_PEEK_SIGINFO copy ->si_code
separately?  IOW, why do we want the upper 16 bits of ->si_code exposed?
It used to be a strictly internal thing IIRC (it's been what, 2.3.late?)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>