From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Alexey Fisher <bug-track-M18mAb7Tlt0yCq4wW13eYl6hYfS7NtTn@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: Intel BIOS - Corrupted low memory at ffff880000004200
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:16:49 +0200
Message-ID: <4A573131.40601@fisher-privat.net>
References: <4A5210A2.2080301@fisher-privat.net> <4A52254F.8080103@fisher-privat.net> <20090708113949.GA8960@srcf.ucam.org> <20090710115238.GA8812@elte.hu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <kernel-testers-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <20090710115238.GA8812-X9Un+BFzKDI@public.gmane.org>
Sender: kernel-testers-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
List-ID: <kernel-testers.vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo-X9Un+BFzKDI@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Matthew Garrett <mjg59-1xO5oi07KQx4cg9Nei1l7Q@public.gmane.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa-YMNOUZJC4hwAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx-hfZtesqFncYOwBW4kG4KsQ@public.gmane.org>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org>, "Pallipadi, Venkatesh" <venkatesh.pallipadi-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>, Yinghai Lu <yinghai-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>, Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw-KKrjLPT3xs0@public.gmane.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>, Kernel Testers List <kernel-testers-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>, "Richard A. Holden III" <aciddeath-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>

Ingo Molnar schrieb:
> * Matthew Garrett <mjg59-1xO5oi07KQx4cg9Nei1l7Q@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, Jul 06, 2009 at 06:24:47PM +0200, Alexey Fisher wrote:
>>> Hallo Ingo, Richard.
>>>
>>> I'm getting "Corrupted low memory" trace with my Intel DG45ID 
>>> board after resume. This board has different dmi-bios-vendor... 
>>> so probably it will be nice to have it in your patch.
>> I'm beginning to think that we should be doing this on all 
>> hardware, perhaps with a kernel option to disable it for embedded 
>> devices that really need that 64K. The low-memory corruption issue 
>> seems to be very widespread.
> 
> The problem is that the BIOS corrupted memory that it also marked as 
> 'usable' in its E820 map it gave to the kernel. If that memory is 
> not usable, it should not have been marked as such. Also, some of 
> the reports showed corruption beyond this range so the workaround is 
> not universal.
> 
> So i'd really like to know what is happening there, instead of just 
> zapping support for 64K of RAM on the majority of Linux systems.
> 
> We might end up doing the same thing in the end (i.e. disable that 
> 64k of RAM) - but it should be an informed decision, not a wild stab 
> in the dark.
> 
> 	Ingo

If i make memory dump like "dd if=/dev/mem of=memdump.dd bs=64k count=1" 
before and after suspend. Will it help you find out whats happening.