From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Bailey Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] check_ivt panic / binutils Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2006 22:17:19 -0400 Message-ID: <1159841839.5737.13.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <200610030211.k932BbeR023905@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0520993705==" Cc: parisc-linux@parisc-linux.org To: John David Anglin Return-Path: In-reply-to: <200610030211.k932BbeR023905@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> List-Id: parisc-linux developers list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: parisc-linux-bounces@lists.parisc-linux.org --===============0520993705== Content-type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-ZVw12ZV2efOwHwkBNedL" --=-ZVw12ZV2efOwHwkBNedL Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Le lundi 02 octobre 2006 =C3=A0 22:11 -0400, John David Anglin a =C3=A9crit= : > > I bisected the binutils CVS until I found the failure point. It seems > > that with 2006-04-30 I don't get the check_ivt failure (although the > > kernel does die immediately after e100 is initialised), but at > > 2006-05-01, I get the check_ivt failure. >=20 > It's not at all obvious why you think this is a binutils bug. Sorry, the first part of the conversation happened on IRC, my bad. I was trying to figure out why I was seeing a problem that Joel had reported before and no-one else was. Kyle got me to try a sid chroot, and it didn't happen there. Eventually I narrowed down the difference between a working kernel and a non-working one was whether I was using a bleeding edge CVS snapshot, or whether I was using the released binutils-2.17 package. I'm not claiming I know where the bug is, but I wanted to know what the change was that happened between a bootable kernel and a non-bootable kernel. > > IIR: 0e60109c ISR: 0000000000000000 IOR: 0000000100000000 >=20 > $ disasm 0x0e60109c > 0: 0e 60 10 9c ldw 0(r19),ret0 >=20 > > r16-19 00000000f00003b0 00000000f000024c 00000000f0002b4c 000000010000= 0000 >=20 > The r19 value is the problem. --=20 Although when you're in the situation that RMS is telling you that you're being too ideological about freedom, maybe, just maybe, it's true. - Matthew Wilcox --=-ZVw12ZV2efOwHwkBNedL Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?= -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBFIcgv5M5hmdCYCpkRAuqUAKDfMmpoT0vbi6oul/YatfF8/eNPxACcD7Pq c25VNXQg4gSlfq1/bszPLcY= =j+30 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-ZVw12ZV2efOwHwkBNedL-- --===============0520993705== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ parisc-linux mailing list parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org http://lists.parisc-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/parisc-linux --===============0520993705==--