From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DFB11DDE2F for ; Tue, 5 Feb 2008 09:27:29 +1100 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2008 23:20:47 +0100 From: "Gerhard Pircher" In-Reply-To: <20080204104232.GB29484@csn.ul.ie> Message-ID: <20080204222047.243670@gmx.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20080201184254.174020@gmx.net> <20080201191119.GI18688@csn.ul.ie> <20080201200518.174050@gmx.net> <20080201202518.GJ18688@csn.ul.ie> <20080201210656.174030@gmx.net> <20080204104232.GB29484@csn.ul.ie> Subject: Re: Commit for mm/page_alloc.c breaks boot process on my machine To: Mel Gorman Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , -------- Original-Nachricht -------- > Datum: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 10:42:32 +0000 > Von: Mel Gorman > An: Gerhard Pircher > CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org > Betreff: Re: Commit for mm/page_alloc.c breaks boot process on my machine > > > > > 2. Any chance of seeing a dmesg log? > > > > That's a little bit of a problem. The kernel log in memory doesn't > > > > show any kernel oops, but is also fragmented (small fragments seem > > > > to have been overwritten with 0x0). > > > > > > err, that doesn't sound very healthy. > > > > Yeah, I know. But the platform code hasn't changed much when porting it > > from arch/ppc to arch/powerpc. That's why I'm a little bit lost in this > > case. :-) > > > > I'm at a bit of a loss to guess what might have changed in powerpc code > that would explain this. I've added the linuxppc-dev mailing list in > case they can make a guess. Yes, I'll try to get some comments on the linuxppc-dev mailing list. > I think you are also going to need to start bisecting searching > specifically for the patch that causes these overwrites. I think I had a similar problem with kernel v2.6.23, too and therefore waited for kernel 2.6.24. So the problem may exist since a long time. > It's a virtual address so it depends on the value of CONFIG_KERNEL_START > as to whether this is a user program address or not. AFAIK start_kernel() is called very early in the boot process, were no user or kernel thread is active. I also wonder why the kernel crashes when the mem boot option is used. Let's see what the linuxppc-dev people say. Thanks for your help! Gerhard -- Psssst! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört? Der kann`s mit allen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger