![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
"Randy.Dunlap" <rddunlap@osdl.org> wrote: > > Call Trace: > [<c0120d93>] __might_sleep+0x53/0x74 > [<c010d001>] save_v86_state+0x71/0x1f0 > [<c010dbd5>] handle_vm86_fault+0xc5/0xa90 > [<c019cac8>] ext3_file_write+0x28/0xc0 > [<c011cd96>] __change_page_attr+0x26/0x220 > [<c010b310>] do_general_protection+0x0/0x90 > [<c010a69d>] error_code+0x2d/0x40 > [<c0109657>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb > > My (more) vague understanding is that X(?) got the kernel to > do_general_protection() somehow, but change_page_attr() does this: > spin_lock_irqsave(&cpa_lock, flags); > in arch/i386/mm/pageattr.c (I'm on a UP box), > so irqs are disabled by the kernel and then we calls put_user() > with a spinlock held. The __change_page_attr() there looks like stack gunk. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:47 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||