Re: [PATCH 0/2] audit: fix soft lockup

From: Luiz Capitulino
Date: Thu Sep 05 2013 - 09:29:43 EST

Next message: John Stoffel: "Re: [PATCH] dcache: Translating dentry into pathname without takingrename_lock"
Previous message: Frederic Weisbecker: "Re: do_softirq() vs __do_softirq() in irq_exit() and stack overflow"
In reply to: Luiz Capitulino: "[PATCH 1/2] audit: flush_hold_queue(): don't drop queued SKBs"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 00:48:53 -0400
Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> The second patch fixes a softlockup which is fully described and now is
> 100% reproducible with simple steps. The first patch fixes a bug I found
> while working on the second patch.

Can someone look at this series please? This is a very reproducible bug.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: John Stoffel: "Re: [PATCH] dcache: Translating dentry into pathname without takingrename_lock"
Previous message: Frederic Weisbecker: "Re: do_softirq() vs __do_softirq() in irq_exit() and stack overflow"
In reply to: Luiz Capitulino: "[PATCH 1/2] audit: flush_hold_queue(): don't drop queued SKBs"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]