From: David Ahern Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 18:05:05 +0000 Subject: Re: 4.0.0-rc4: panic in free_block Message-Id: <550C6151.8070803@oracle.com> List-Id: References: <550C37C9.2060200@oracle.com> <550C5078.8040402@oracle.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Linus Torvalds , linux-mm Cc: "David S. Miller" , LKML , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org On 3/20/15 10:58 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > That said, SLAB is probably also almost unheard of in high-CPU > configurations, since slub has all the magical unlocked lists etc for > scalability. So maybe it's a generic SLAB bug, and nobody with lots of > CPU's is testing SLAB. > Evidently, it is a well known problem internally that goes back to at least 2.6.39. To this point I have not paid attention to the allocators. At what point is SLUB considered stable for large systems? Is 2.6.39 stable? As for SLAB it is not clear if this is a sparc only problem. Perhaps the config should have a warning? It looks like SLAB is still the default for most arch. DaveM: do you mind if I submit a patch to change the default for sparc to SLUB? Now that the monster is unleashed, off to other problems... Thanks, David