On Wed, 6 Apr, 2005 22:49:03 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 12:41:17PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 04:44:55PM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> > I arrived at the office today to find my workstation had this spew
> > in its dmesg buffer..
> Looks like rando
Can people who can reproduce the x86-64 2.6.11 pmd bad problem please apply
the following patch and see (a) if it can be still reprocuded with it
and send the output generated. Also a strace of the program that showed
it (pid and name of it should be dumped) would be useful if not too big.
Afte
On Tue, 19 Apr 2005, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 06:58:20PM +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> >
> > I must confess, with all due respect to Andi, that I don't understand his
> > dismissal of the possibility that load_cr3 in leave_mm might be the fix
> > (to create_elf_tables writing use
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 06:58:20PM +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Apr 2005, Chris Wright wrote:
> > * Andi Kleen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 11:27:12AM -0700, Chris Wright wrote:
> > > > Yes, I've seen it in .11 and earlier kernels. Happen to have same
> > > >
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 06:58:20PM +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> > > If there was a fix for the bad pmd problem it might be a candidate
> > > for stable, but so far we dont know what causes it yet.
> > If I figure a way to trigger here, I'll report back.
>
> Dave, earlier on you were quite ab
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005, Chris Wright wrote:
> * Andi Kleen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 11:27:12AM -0700, Chris Wright wrote:
> > > Yes, I've seen it in .11 and earlier kernels. Happen to have same
> > > "x86_64" string on my bad pmd dumps, but can't reproduce it at all.
> >
* Andi Kleen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 11:27:12AM -0700, Chris Wright wrote:
> > Yes, I've seen it in .11 and earlier kernels. Happen to have same
> > "x86_64" string on my bad pmd dumps, but can't reproduce it at all.
> > So, for now, I can hold off on adding the reload
On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 11:27:12AM -0700, Chris Wright wrote:
> * Andi Kleen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > I will take a closer look at the rc1/rc2 patches later this evening
> > > and see if I can spot something. Can only report back tomorrow though.
> >
> > Actually itt started in .11 already
* Andi Kleen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > I will take a closer look at the rc1/rc2 patches later this evening
> > and see if I can spot something. Can only report back tomorrow though.
>
> Actually itt started in .11 already - sigh - on rereading the thread.
> That will make the code audit harde
> I will take a closer look at the rc1/rc2 patches later this evening
> and see if I can spot something. Can only report back tomorrow though.
Actually itt started in .11 already - sigh - on rereading the thread.
That will make the code audit harder :/
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send
On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 06:34:58PM +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Apr 2005, Andi Kleen wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for the analysis. However I doubt the load_cr3 patch can fix
> > it. All it does is to stop the CPU from prefetching mappings (which
> > can cause different problem).
>
> I though
On Thu, 14 Apr 2005, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> Thanks for the analysis. However I doubt the load_cr3 patch can fix
> it. All it does is to stop the CPU from prefetching mappings (which
> can cause different problem).
I thought that the leave_mm code (before your patch) flushes the TLB, but
restores c
> It looks very much as if the mm being created has for pmd a page
> which was used for user stack in the outgoing mm; but somehow exec's
> exit_mmap TLB flushing hasn't taken effect. I only now noticed this
> patch where you fix just such an issue.
Thanks for the analysis. However I doubt the lo
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Dave Jones wrote:
> > I realised today that this happens every time X starts up for
> > the first time. I did some experiments, and found that with 2.6.12rc1
> > it's gone. Either it got fixed accidentally, or its hidden now
> > by one of the many changes i
Dave Jones reported seeing bad pmd messages in 2.6.11.6. I've been
seeing them with 2.6.11 and today with 2.6.11.6. When I first saw the
problem I ran memtest86 and it didn't catch anything after ~3hours.
However, I don't see them when X starts. They tend to happen after a
program segfaults:
2.6.1
> I realised today that this happens every time X starts up for
> the first time. I did some experiments, and found that with 2.6.12rc1
> it's gone. Either it got fixed accidentally, or its hidden now
> by one of the many changes in 4-level patches.
>
> I'll try and narrow this down a little mor
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 12:41:17PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 04:44:55PM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> > [apologies to Andi for getting this twice, I goofed the l-k address
> > the first time]
> >
> >
> > I arrived at the office today to find my workstation had this
On Friday 01 April 2005 01:52, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 12:41:17PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 04:44:55PM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> > > [apologies to Andi for getting this twice, I goofed the l-k address
> > > the first time]
> > >
> > >
> > >
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 12:41:17PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 04:44:55PM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> > [apologies to Andi for getting this twice, I goofed the l-k address
> > the first time]
> >
> >
> > I arrived at the office today to find my workstation had this
On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 04:44:55PM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> [apologies to Andi for getting this twice, I goofed the l-k address
> the first time]
>
>
> I arrived at the office today to find my workstation had this spew
> in its dmesg buffer..
Looks like random memory corruption to me.
Can
[apologies to Andi for getting this twice, I goofed the l-k address
the first time]
I arrived at the office today to find my workstation had this spew
in its dmesg buffer..
mm/memory.c:97: bad pmd 81004b017438(0038a5500a88).
mm/memory.c:97: bad pmd 81004b017440(000
21 matches
Mail list logo
