From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from TX2EHSOBE005.bigfish.com (tx2ehsobe003.messaging.microsoft.com [65.55.88.13]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC522B7107 for ; Fri, 10 Sep 2010 05:41:52 +1000 (EST) Received: from mail138-tx2 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail138-tx2-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A89F3122863D for ; Thu, 9 Sep 2010 19:41:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TX2EHSMHS006.bigfish.com (unknown [10.9.14.254]) by mail138-tx2.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF3F61A1804D for ; Thu, 9 Sep 2010 19:41:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from de01smr01.freescale.net (de01smr01.freescale.net [10.208.0.31]) by az33egw02.freescale.net (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o89JepPl029263 for ; Thu, 9 Sep 2010 12:41:02 -0700 (MST) Received: from az33exm25.fsl.freescale.net (az33exm25.am.freescale.net [10.64.32.16]) by de01smr01.freescale.net (8.13.1/8.13.0) with ESMTP id o89JsqDw006885 for ; Thu, 9 Sep 2010 14:54:52 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <4C893842.6090009@freescale.com> Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2010 14:40:50 -0500 From: Timur Tabi MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Ira W. Snyder" Subject: Re: CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING broken on 83xx (and all of powerpc?) References: <20100908232124.GB30291@ovro.caltech.edu> <1283994156.6515.6.camel@pasglop> <20100909025214.GA21846@ovro.caltech.edu> <1284001096.6515.33.camel@pasglop> <20100909162306.GA3496@ovro.caltech.edu> <20100909184446.GB3496@ovro.caltech.edu> <20100909193642.GD3496@ovro.caltech.edu> In-Reply-To: <20100909193642.GD3496@ovro.caltech.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Cc: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Ira W. Snyder wrote: > As noted in another email, it appears that U-Boot puts the FDT in such a > place that Linux overwrites it with the BSS. The CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=y > option expands the BSS by a large amount, which causes the error. It > isn't directly lockdep related. > > I don't know if this is a U-Boot problem or a Linux problem. I have no > idea how to fix the bug. I wonder if this patch that I wrote for U-Boot will fix the problem: http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2010-May/071822.html -- Timur Tabi Linux kernel developer at Freescale