BUG: MAX_STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES too low!

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: LKML <linux-kernel@...>
Date: Thursday, April 17, 2008 - 6:01 pm

Hi there,

just before upgrading from -rc9 to -final, this showed up in the logs:

BUG: MAX_STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES too low!
turning off the locking correctness validator.
Pid: 30729, comm: mv Not tainted 2.6.25-rc9 #2
  [<c013a842>] save_trace+0x92/0xa0
  [<c013a894>] add_lock_to_list+0x44/0xc0
  [<c013cfe1>] __lock_acquire+0xec1/0xf90
  [<c01756a3>] lock_rename+0x73/0xf0
  [<c013d36c>] lock_release_non_nested+0x10c/0x1b0
  [<c01756a3>] lock_rename+0x73/0xf0
  [<c017573b>] unlock_rename+0x1b/0x60
  [<c013d4a7>] lock_release+0x97/0x170
  [<c04857e3>] __mutex_unlock_slowpath+0x53/0x110
  [<c017573b>] unlock_rename+0x1b/0x60
  [<c017827b>] sys_renameat+0x1fb/0x210
  [<c0486893>] _spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x33/0x60
  [<c016e7b2>] vfs_write+0x102/0x140
  [<c01782b7>] sys_rename+0x27/0x30
  [<c0102eb6>] sysenter_past_esp+0x5f/0xa5
  =======================

A quick search on the net tells me, this has been reported around ~2.6.18, 
but this was back in 2006. My box here is still running fine, and I'm not 
sure how to reproduce this one - there hasn't been much I/O when the BUG 
occured. I just wanted t have this reported...

Full dmesg and .config: http://nerdbynature.de/bits/2.6.25-rc9/

Thanks,
Christian.
-- 
BOFH excuse #339:

manager in the cable duct
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
BUG: MAX_STACK_TRACE_ENTRIES too low!, Christian Kujau, (Thu Apr 17, 6:01 pm)