Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 13 Jul 2008 23:04:13 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: per-cpu related? |
| |
* Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 11:55 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote: > > > > * Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> thanks > >> > >> could be caused by max_low_pfn_mapped patch...because hpet still use > >> fixmap address that is cleared by others. > > still got > > calling __stack_chk_test+0x0/0x89 > Testing -fstack-protector-all feature > -fstack-protector-all test failed > ------------[ cut here ]------------ > WARNING: at kernel/panic.c:393 __stack_chk_test+0x61/0x89() > Modules linked in: > Pid: 1, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.26-rc9-tip-01873-ga9827e7-dirty #359 > > Call Trace: > [<ffffffff8026615e>] warn_on_slowpath+0x6c/0xa7 > [<ffffffff80266199>] ? __stack_chk_test+0x0/0x89 > [<ffffffff80266199>] ? __stack_chk_test+0x0/0x89 > [<ffffffff8022a4f4>] ? mcount_call+0x5/0x31 > [<ffffffff80266199>] ? __stack_chk_test+0x0/0x89 > [<ffffffff802661fa>] __stack_chk_test+0x61/0x89 > [<ffffffff80e729e4>] kernel_init+0x1de/0x346 > [<ffffffff8022a4f4>] ? mcount_call+0x5/0x31 > [<ffffffff80262df7>] ? finish_task_switch+0x14/0xe3 > [<ffffffff8022b589>] child_rip+0xa/0x11 > [<ffffffff80e72806>] ? kernel_init+0x0/0x346 > [<ffffffff8022b57f>] ? child_rip+0x0/0x11 > > ---[ end trace 0f276ea63a4e83de ]---
please try latest tip/master - the self-test had to be removed. (gcc will treat the stackprotector-failure function as ((noreturn)) attribute and will optimize out the return path, making a reliable self-test impossible in the way we tried to)
Ingo
| |