On Fri, 20 Jul 2007, Pekka J Enberg wrote:
> There's some heavy-duty function inlining going on in__kmalloc so could
> you please work out the exact location of the oops as described in
> Documentation/BUG-HUNTING (look for the "use GDB to translate" part).
And, of course, please check if a5c96d
Hi Roland,
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Roland Dreier wrote:
> [ 1350.668590] Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at
> 0028 RIP:
> [ 1350.674068] [] __kmalloc+0x51/0xaf
There's some heavy-duty function inlining going on in__kmalloc so could
you please work out the exact locati
On Thursday 19 July 2007 21:19:29 Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > Does something like this fix it?
> >
> > Christoph, please go over this and see if there are other cases like that.
>
> Actually, here's a better version, I think.
>
> Andi, does this
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> Does something like this fix it?
>
> Christoph, please go over this and see if there are other cases like that.
Actually, here's a better version, I think.
Andi, does this patch fix your problem?
Linus
---
mm/slab.c |4 ++--
Linus Torvalds wrote:
Ok, I think I see it: I think the mm/slab.c conversion of kmalloc(0) is
totally broken.
The problem? It returns ZERO_SIZE_PTR from __find_general_cachep(), not
from __kmalloc(). So anythign that uses __find_general_cachep() will get
an invalid cachep pointer, which was no
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Roland Dreier wrote:
>
> I think the oops below is related -- Michael reports that avoiding
> kmalloc(0) in the mlx4_ib driver makes it go away.
Ok, I think I see it: I think the mm/slab.c conversion of kmalloc(0) is
totally broken.
The problem? It returns ZERO_SIZE_PTR fro
On Thursday 19 July 2007 16:08:34 Pekka Enberg wrote:
> Hi Andi,
>
> On 7/19/07, Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > qemu testing and booting test machines with i386 kernels wasn't very
> > successfull
> > with recent git kernels. I got either BUGs because of failing sysfs
> > initializati
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> qemu testing and booting test machines with i386 kernels wasn't very
> successfull
> with recent git kernels. I got either BUGs because of failing sysfs
> initialization
> or oopses in kmalloc, but no user land.
Can you send in the oopses and BUGs? T
I think the oops below is related -- Michael reports that avoiding
kmalloc(0) in the mlx4_ib driver makes it go away.
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: oops on mlx4 modprobe
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Roland Dreier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 11:47:51 +0300
Reply-T
Hi Andi,
On 7/19/07, Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
qemu testing and booting test machines with i386 kernels wasn't very successfull
with recent git kernels. I got either BUGs because of failing sysfs
initialization
or oopses in kmalloc, but no user land.
I bisected it down to this comm
qemu testing and booting test machines with i386 kernels wasn't very successfull
with recent git kernels. I got either BUGs because of failing sysfs
initialization
or oopses in kmalloc, but no user land.
I bisected it down to this commit.
To reproduce: try to boot a 386 defconfig kernel, compil
11 matches
Mail list logo
