From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx2-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.92] helo=mail.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list1-new.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KY2cV-0002m4-IX for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 26 Aug 2008 10:46:19 -0700 Received: from [198.99.130.12] (helo=saraswathi.solana.com) by mail.sourceforge.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.44) id 1KY2cT-0005I7-NK for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 26 Aug 2008 10:46:19 -0700 Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 13:46:00 -0400 From: Jeff Dike Message-ID: <20080826174600.GA24342@c2.user-mode-linux.org> References: <4898AC10.3010602@meduna.org> <7B4268E5ACB878429B58D4BE5B780E8301A303A5@NWS-EXCH2.nws.oregonstate.edu> <48995D1A.6030203@meduna.org> <489AC525.3060305@meduna.org> <489AE6DD.2000200@meduna.org> <489C3D9B.7070605@meduna.org> <20080825215124.GB12626@c2.user-mode-linux.org> <48B3AED8.5040904@meduna.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <48B3AED8.5040904@meduna.org> Subject: Re: [uml-devel] FP registers corruption List-Id: The user-mode Linux development list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: user-mode-linux-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: user-mode-linux-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net To: Stanislav Meduna Cc: user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 09:20:56AM +0200, Stanislav Meduna wrote: > I tried to isolate the exact version, but I was not able > to compile/run all the UML versions in my test environment > (current Ubuntu) - obviously the UML is quite sensitive > to the host kernel as well. It's not. Any 2.6 UML should run on a any 2.6 host. If you are having problems that look like version skew problems, say what they are. > So the only thing I can say is that I cannot reproduce > it with neither 2.6.24.7 nor 2.6.26.2 guest in my environment. > The only instance I am seeing it is the 2.6.26 guest on > 2.6.23.17 host at my provider :( In an earlier email, you provide a nice test case. However, I'm running that here, and getting page after page of successful key generation. Is there anything else that might be relevant to reproducing this? Jeff -- Work email - jdike at linux dot intel dot com ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ User-mode-linux-devel mailing list User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel