On Mon, 2012-03-05 at 10:54 -0500, Don Zickus wrote: > This is one way of doing this. I was trying to avoid this when I rewrote the > nmi handlers, because everyone kept screwing up the structs. I thought it > would be safer to have callers pass in data based on an api instead.
Apparently kmemcheck marks pages as non-present and does magic in the fault handler. Having the action thing allocated meant kmemcheck also marks that thing as non-present in the page-tables, the list iteration from NMI context would then fault and things would go funny. There's two ways out, help kmemcheck with a new annotation (which of course starts with checking if there isn't already such a thing). Or this one, avoid the action things from being allocated, this side-steps kmemcheck and avoids the problem thusly. Sadly this patch doesn't at all mention the first possibility and why that isn't a feasible approach. A well... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d _______________________________________________ Openipmi-developer mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openipmi-developer
