lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Dec]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [Bug 7505] Linux-2.6.18 fails to boot on AMD64 machine
    From
    Date
    Il giorno ven, 22/12/2006 alle 00.30 -0800, Andrew Morton ha scritto:
    > On Fri, 22 Dec 2006 09:22:48 +0100
    > Ard -kwaak- van Breemen <ard@telegraafnet.nl> wrote:
    >
    > > Hello,
    > > On Fri, Dec 22, 2006 at 12:41:46PM +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
    > > > I think parse_args enables irq when it calls callbacks.
    > > > Could you try below?
    > > > 1) Test Andrew's patch of sema down_write;
    > > > 2) Apply below patch and see what the output is when booting. If the output has
    > > > "[BUG]..address.", Pls. map the address to function name by System.map.
    > > Without proof^H^H^H^H^Hpasting my dmesg and the "diff", I already
    > > concluded that ide_setup was the culprit. (I've debuged
    > > parse_one, and it barfed around the 3rd parameter which is
    > > hdb=noprobe).
    > > Anyway, a bad night of sleep reminds me that our EM64T boxes also
    > > have this line (which actually is a remainder of our VA1220 boxes
    > > ;-) ), and they don't barf, so it must be either the combination
    > > of the sata_nv together with the pata driver part, *or* just the
    > > pata driver part. (Our opteron != nforce chipsets also works).
    > >
    >
    > I expect that you'll find that the ide code ends up doing
    > down_write(pci_bus_sem), which will enable interrupts.
    >
    > (We don't know which interrupt is pending this early - that'd be
    > interesting to find out, but we shouldn't be enabling interrupts in there).
    >
    > To whom do I have to pay how much to get this darn patch tested?
    >
    >
    >
    > --- a/lib/rwsem-spinlock.c~down_write-preserve-local-irqs
    > +++ a/lib/rwsem-spinlock.c
    > @@ -195,13 +195,14 @@ void fastcall __sched __down_write_neste
    > {
    > struct rwsem_waiter waiter;
    > struct task_struct *tsk;
    > + unsigned long flags;
    >
    > - spin_lock_irq(&sem->wait_lock);
    > + spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait_lock, flags);
    >
    > if (sem->activity == 0 && list_empty(&sem->wait_list)) {
    > /* granted */
    > sem->activity = -1;
    > - spin_unlock_irq(&sem->wait_lock);
    > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->wait_lock, flags);
    > goto out;
    > }
    >
    > @@ -216,7 +217,7 @@ void fastcall __sched __down_write_neste
    > list_add_tail(&waiter.list, &sem->wait_list);
    >
    > /* we don't need to touch the semaphore struct anymore */
    > - spin_unlock_irq(&sem->wait_lock);
    > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->wait_lock, flags);
    >
    > /* wait to be given the lock */
    > for (;;) {
    > _
    >
    Applied to 2.6.19 it doesn't change anything. It still panics.

    How can I have something similar to a serial console on a laptop without
    serial port but with a parallel one? Will netconsole work?



    --
    Stefano Takekawa
    take@libero.it

    Frank: And why do days get longer in the summer?
    Ernest: Because heat makes things expand!


    -
    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: 2006-12-22 10:41    [W:0.032 / U:60.444 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site