From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jay Lan Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 15:27:35 +0000 Subject: Re: [Patch] min_low_pfn and max_low_pfn calcultion fix Message-Id: <45F81467.2010302@sgi.com> List-Id: References: <1172619535.20006.334.camel@linux-znh> In-Reply-To: <1172619535.20006.334.camel@linux-znh> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org Magnus Damm wrote: [snip] >> >> I tested on 2.6.21-rc3 with DEBUG_VM turned on. The vanilla 2.6.21-rc3 >> without Nan-hai's patch, panicked on bugcheck on free_initmem->free_page >> as predicted. We still need this patch. > > Ok, thanks for testing. =) > >> However, the zero-size vmcore problem is back on SN. But that is a >> dfiffernet problem. > > Argh, more problems... I found the problem. It was the "elfcorehdr" introduced in 2.6.21-rc1. Without specifying it, the elfcorehdr_addr is initialized to ELFCORE_ADDR_MAX. Later, a check in reserve_elfcorehdr will fail: if (elfcorehdr_addr >= ELFCORE_ADDR_MAX) return -EINVAL; Is it supposed to be a physical address to store elf core header? If so, it is not possible for SN to provide a physical address at boot time, just like in the case of crashkernel=X@Y where Y is not used. Thanks, - jay > > / magnus > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html