From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: pwaechtler@mac.com (Peter =?iso-8859-1?q?W=E4chtler?=) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 20:19:16 +0200 Subject: since when does ARM map the kernel memory in sections? In-Reply-To: References: <201104122052.17453.pwaechtler@mac.com> Message-ID: <201104132019.16294.pwaechtler@mac.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Am Dienstag, 12. April 2011, 21:11:59 schrieb Colin Cross: > On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Peter W?chtler wrote: > > Hello Linux ARM developers, > > > > did the ARM Linux 2.6 kernel map the kernel memory in pages in the past? > > Or was the memory always mapped in sections? > > > > I still have to chase a potential memory corruption. The rootfs is > > located on a SDcard and gets corrupted even when the filesystem test > > programs write to different partitions. > > The test scenario includes several dozen or even hundreds of warm and > > cold boot sequences, file system write tests with sudden soft resets. > > It's a large embedded project with a lot of drivers and the fact that > > always the rootfs and often the superblock gets damaged let me think of > > a memory corruption. > > Gary King posted some patches a while ago that switched the kernel > back to page mappings, so he could modify attributes on some pages to > be non-cacheable. The patches were not accepted, but you can probably > dig them up for testing. Thanx for the tip. I already found the patch and applied it. Some probs on config but not tested yet... Peter