On 5/16/16, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> On 5/16/16, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 07:42:35PM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>
>>> Unfortunately, I could not reproduce this again with none of my
>>> 183-kernels.
>>> When I first hit a "chain_key collision" issue, it was hard to
>>> redprod
- Sedat -
From b953be255bfb46970c75950e297be836577bc525 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sedat Dilek
Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 15:51:04 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] locking/lockdep: Some more additional chain_key collision
information
From: Peter Zijlstra
For more details see thread "[v4.6-rc7-183-g1410b
On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 07:42:35PM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> Unfortunately, I could not reproduce this again with none of my 183-kernels.
> When I first hit a "chain_key collision" issue, it was hard to redproduce, so.
> Any idea, how I can "force" this?
Nope; I wish I knew, that'd be so much e
is is only a (lockdep) warning.
>> #2: I have not a "vanilla" Linux v4.6-rc7+ here (see P.S. and attached
>> patch)
>
> Having such a kernel base is certainly not helpful to the quality of your
> report,
> please try to reproduce under the vanilla kernel.
>
>> Fo
Linux v4.6-rc7+ here (see P.S. and attached patch)
Having such a kernel base is certainly not helpful to the quality of your
report,
please try to reproduce under the vanilla kernel.
> For a more helpful feedback I should test a...
> #1: vanilla v4.6-rc7-183-g1410b74e4061
I'd suggest v4
t a "vanilla" Linux v4.6-rc7+ here (see P.S. and attached patch)
>
> For a more helpful feedback I should test a...
> #1: vanilla v4.6-rc7-183-g1410b74e4061
> #2: net.git#master on top of #1
>
> What I am seeing is this while surfing with a UMTS/HSPA internet-stick
>
