Messages in this thread | | | From | Alistair John Strachan <> | Subject | Re: BUG? atleast >=2.6.19-rc5, x86 chroot on x86_64| perhaps duplicate bug report? | Date | Sun, 26 Nov 2006 19:52:11 +0000 |
| |
On Sunday 26 November 2006 18:07, Kasper Sandberg wrote: > On Wed, 2006-11-22 at 15:25 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 15:29:02 +0100 > > > > Kasper Sandberg <lkml@metanurb.dk> wrote: > > > it appears some sort of bug has gotten into .19, in regards to x86 > > > emulation on x86_64. > > > > > > i have only tested with >=rc5, thw folling, as an example, appears in > > > dmesg: > > > ioctl32(regedit.exe:11801): Unknown cmd fd(9) cmd(82187201){02} > > > arg(00221000) on /home/redeeman > > > ioctl32(regedit.exe:11801): Unknown cmd fd(9) cmd(82187201){02} > > > arg(00221000) on /home/redeeman/.wine/drive_c/windows/system32 > > > > Try > > > > echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/compat-log > > > > I don't _think_ we did anything to change the logging in there. Which > > kernel version were you using previously (the one which didn't do this)? > > it just struck me, that this may be the same bug Jesper Juhl has > discovered (atleast the hardlock part), as i read that thread, it strike > me that whenever i have hardlocks from this, its when i in wine runs > stuff that uses basically all my ram, and MAY even touch my swap.
I see this same ioctl32 warning on a few apps running inside Wine, but I've not had any hard locks. On the contrary, everything works fine.
I guess it would be nice to know which ioctl it is that doesn't have a compat wrapper on x86-64, 82187201 is a bit cryptic.
HTH.
-- Cheers, Alistair.
Final year Computer Science undergraduate. 1F2 55 South Clerk Street, Edinburgh, UK. - 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/
| |