Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 01 Feb 2008 22:06:56 +0100 | From | "Gerhard Pircher" <> | Subject | Re: Commit for mm/page_alloc.c breaks boot process on my machine |
| |
-------- Original-Nachricht -------- > Datum: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 20:25:18 +0000 > Von: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> > An: Gerhard Pircher <gerhard_pircher@gmx.net> > CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Betreff: Re: Commit for mm/page_alloc.c breaks boot process on my machine
> I meant uninitialised memory but I also wonder could something like this > happen if you are trying to use memory that doesn't exist. i.e. you are > trying to access more memory than you really have but you indicate later > that this is not the case. Good question. The memory is in the physical address range from 0x00000000 to 0x60000000 (1536MB).
> > > 2. Any chance of seeing a dmesg log? > > That's a little bit of a problem. The kernel log in memory doesn't show > > any kernel oops, but is also fragmented (small fragments seem to have > > been overwritten with 0x0). > > err, that doesn't sound very healthy. Yeah, I know. But the platform code hasn't changed much when porting it from arch/ppc to arch/powerpc. That's why I'm a little bit lost in this case. :-)
> > Well, I can't answer this question. The kernel currently locks up when > > loading the INIT program. But that is another problem (I still have to > > bisect it) and doesn't seem to be related to this problem. > > INIT would be the first MOVABLE allocation so it would be using memory > at the end of the physical adddress range. i.e. the crash happens when > memory towards the end and the only difference between the patch applied > and reverted is when it happens. Oh, that sounds interesting!
> Could you try booting with 16MB less memory using mem=? I started the kernel with 512MB RAM (mem=496) and 1.5GB (mem=1520). The kernel oopes in both cases with a "Unable to handle kernel paging request for data address 0xbffff000", followed by a "Oops: kernel access of bad area, sig 11" message. The end of the stack trace shows the start_here() function. I'm not a PowerPC expert, but if 0xbffff000 is a virtual address, then it would be in the user program address space, right? If it is a physical address, then it is somewhere in the unallocated PCI address space.
Gerhard
-- Ist Ihr Browser Vista-kompatibel? Jetzt die neuesten Browser-Versionen downloaden: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/browser
| |