Messages in this thread Patch in this message |  | | From | Neil Brown <> | Date | Wed, 6 Dec 2000 09:00:15 +1100 (EST) | Subject | Re: kernel panic in SoftwareRAID autodetection |
| |
On Monday December 4, robertoragusa@technologist.com wrote: > On 01-Dec-00, Neil Brown wrote: > > On Friday December 1, robertoragusa@technologist.com wrote: > >> I found a real showstopper problem in the SoftwareRAID autodetect > >> code; 2.4.0-test10 and 2.4.0-test11 are affected (I didn't test > >> previous versions). > [detailed report] > > > > Fixed in 2.4.0-test12pre3. > > I tried 2.4.0-test12pre3. > The problem is *not* fixed: kernel panic again.
My apologies. There was a "oops in SoftwareRAID autodetect" in test10 and test11 that was fixed in test12pre3, and I just assumed that your's was the same, and didn't look at it properly.
On looking again, your problem is definately different and quite weird.
The fact that it works fine with "console=ttyS0" but doesn't without is very suspicious. It suggests to me that there is some odd interaction going on, and that the problem may well have nothing directly to do with RAID.
I will try to reproduce it myself, but I suspect that there is at least an even chance that I won't be able to. If small changes like "console=ttyS0" make it go away then some other small difference in my setup could equally change the result.
The code which was Oopsing was in kfree, and this seems to compile very differently for SMP than for UP. I think that you were compiling for UP - is that correct? Could you try compiling with SMP support and see if that makes a difference?
...... however, I went back and poured over the code for a little while, and I think I found something. linear.c may over-run a kmalloced buffer, which could product exactly what you are getting. The following patch isn't *correct*, but if it makes a difference for you, then it means that we have found the problem.. please let me know.
--- drivers/md/linear.c 2000/12/03 22:14:54 1.3 +++ drivers/md/linear.c 2000/12/05 21:57:42 @@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ table++; } } - table->dev1 = NULL; +/* table->dev1 = NULL; */ return 0; > > Please CC to me because I'm not a LKML subscriber.
Ofcourse. I think it is common courtesy to reply to the author, and cc to the list if appropriate. I would prefer it if, when replying to me, you send the reply explicitly to me as well as to the list, as that way I get to see it sooner (I only read mail to linux-kernel every few days, whereas mail explicitly addressed to me get a much higher priority).
NeilBrown
> > -- > Roberto Ragusa robertoragusa at technologist.com > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |