Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Sun, 24 Aug 2008 15:48:02 -0700 | From | "Yinghai Lu" <> | Subject | Re: HPET regression in 2.6.26 versus 2.6.25 -- found another user with the same regression |
| |
On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 12:29 PM, Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 6:05 AM, David Witbrodt <dawitbro@sbcglobal.net> wrote: >> >> >>> > - Is there any chance I can get it into the stable 2.6.26.X updates? >>> > (Who should I ask, or are only developers allowed to lobby for this >>> > sort of thing?) >>> >>> after the patch get into linus tree. Greg will put the patch into 2.6.26.X >> >> OK, thanks a bunch. >> >> >>> > - Are you worried about the potential problems of a quirk-based approach? >>> > What if many more people experience a similar regression once 2.6.26 or >>> > later appears in their distribution? I'm sure you don't want to have to >>> > write a different quirk for each individual's hardware, and this problem >>> > did not arise with the approach used for resource management in 2.6.25. >>> >>> this patch should be safe. >>> >>> 2.6.26 is fixing one bug about reserving local apic address and that >>> in e820 table. >>> and it reveals one bios bug. >> >> Correction -- it revealed at least two. See the link I posted earlier in >> this thread: >> >> http://www.uwsg.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0808.2/1807.html >> >> Scroll down to the line that starts with "[blog]" for the link. You can see >> the discussion I had encouraging him to come here to help us troubleshoot >> if you go to that blog and click "Comments". >> >> I only mention this as a warning, in case it could lead to a lot of extra >> problems for you later. If you're quite sure that everything is OK, then >> all I can do is thank you again and keep my fingers crossed for you and the >> kernel team that nothing bad happens when 2.6.2[67] hit the major distros. > > after discussing with Ingo, we have one more generic way to detect the > same situation. > > please help to verify the attached patch. ( don't apply previous patch) >
and please test attached patch too. ( could test it without two patches)
YH From: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> Subject: [PATCH] x86: only put e820 ram entries in resource tree
may need user to have new kexec tools that could create e820 table from /sys/firmware/memmap instead of /proc/iomem for second kernel
Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> Cc: Bernhard Walle <bwalle@suse.de> Cc: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Index: linux-2.6/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c =================================================================== --- linux-2.6.orig/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c +++ linux-2.6/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c @@ -1279,6 +1279,10 @@ void __init e820_reserve_resources(void) res = alloc_bootmem_low(sizeof(struct resource) * e820.nr_map); for (i = 0; i < e820.nr_map; i++) { + if (e820.map[i].type != E820_RAM) { + res++; + continue; + } end = e820.map[i].addr + e820.map[i].size - 1; #ifndef CONFIG_RESOURCES_64BIT if (end > 0x100000000ULL) { | |