Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Mon, 5 May 2008 07:50:40 +0000 | | From | Jarek Poplawski <> | | Subject | Re: Need help debugging memory corruption |
| |
On Mon, May 05, 2008 at 07:27:34AM +0000, Jarek Poplawski wrote: > On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 02:55:29PM -0500, Jay Cliburn wrote: > > On Sun, 04 May 2008 16:55:08 +0200 > > Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Jarek Poplawski wrote, On 05/04/2008 04:24 PM: > > > ... > > > > > > > I'm definitely with less experience, so I wonder why it can't be > > > > a simple race between atl1_clean_rx_ring() and something (maybe even > > > > pending atl1_intr_rx()) on the other cpu writing skb while kfreeing? > > > > > > > > > Hmm... atl1_intr_rx() looks impossible, so atl1_alloc_rx_buffers()? > > > > I booted with nosmp and the bug is *much* harder to hit, but I still > > hit it once out of about 10 tries. Does the fact that I hit it once > > using nosmp disprove the race theory? > > Probably not: I don't know how about preemption model, but especially > some maybe unkilled timers/watchdogs or workqueues could be considered. > Of course this idea looks very unprobable (should happen with less > than 4GB too), but should be quite easy to verify by adding some > temporary spinlocks around these rx ring operations?
Hmm#2... Of course for testing without smp disabling local irqs should be enough. BTW... since this check is done during __free_slab it seems such a corruption could take place before this closing, so maybe this atl1_intr_rx() should be considered in these races yet...
Jarek P.
|  |