On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 09:06 +, David Laight wrote:
> > Ah, yes, the stack here is obviously at a much higher address than
> 4GB.
>
> Are we talking of physical or virtual addresses here?
> (or even user?)
Real.
> Is there a re-entrancy problem using kernel static data?
Not for this code. Th
From: Li Zhong
> On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 22:18 +1000, Anton Blanchard wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > > When trying offline cpus, I noticed following Oops in
> > > rtas_stop_self(), and it seems caused by commit 41dd03a9. The Oops
> > > disappears after reverting this commit.
> > >
> > > After reading the cod
On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 22:18 +1000, Anton Blanchard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > When trying offline cpus, I noticed following Oops in
> > rtas_stop_self(), and it seems caused by commit 41dd03a9. The Oops
> > disappears after reverting this commit.
> >
> > After reading the code, I guess it might be caused
Hi,
> When trying offline cpus, I noticed following Oops in
> rtas_stop_self(), and it seems caused by commit 41dd03a9. The Oops
> disappears after reverting this commit.
>
> After reading the code, I guess it might be caused by moving the
> rtas_args to stack. Still need some more time to read
