[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#261893: kernel-image-2.6.6-1-generic: Kernel bug at mm/slab.c:1530



Some additional information:
I can make the problem disappear (!) by placing a printk() in the ext3 module init function, like this:

--- super.c.orig 2004-09-01 21:21:08.000000000 +0200
+++ super.c 2004-09-01 22:30:54.000000000 +0200
@@ -2337,6 +2337,7 @@
static int __init init_ext3_fs(void)
{
 int err = init_ext3_xattr();
+ printk(KERN_ERR "[%d] init_ext3_fs(), err = %d\n", __LINE__, err);
 if (err)
  return err;
 err = init_inodecache();

Like this it also works:

--- super.c.orig 2004-09-01 21:21:08.000000000 +0200
+++ super.c 2004-09-01 22:31:28.000000000 +0200
@@ -2339,6 +2339,7 @@
 int err = init_ext3_xattr();
 if (err)
  return err;
+ printk(KERN_ERR "[%d] init_ext3_fs(), err = %d\n", __LINE__, err);
 err = init_inodecache();
 if (err)
  goto out1;

In both cases, err = 0
But one more line down and I have the OOPS back again:

--- super.c.orig 2004-09-01 21:21:08.000000000 +0200
+++ super.c 2004-09-01 22:36:46.000000000 +0200
@@ -2340,6 +2340,7 @@
 if (err)
  return err;
 err = init_inodecache();
+ printk(KERN_ERR "[%d] init_ext3_fs(), err = %d\n", __LINE__, err);
 if (err)
  goto out1;
        err = register_filesystem(&ext3_fs_type);


I don't think placing a strategic printk() qualifies as a fix though :-)
Maybe GCC is to blame here. I'm using gcc 3.3.4-6sarge1.0.1 (current from testing)
Is it safe to use GCC 3.4.1 on this kernel?

Jan-Jaap





Reply to: