On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 04:38:38PM -0500, Kyle McMartin wrote: > execshield rebased against 2.6.28, merged by git and then fixed up > by hand. > > build tested against x86-64 and pae/non-pae i386. > > i'm uploading a scratch srpm but it will take a damned long time to > upload so i'll include the build id in a reply. interdiff choked, so I moved your diff over the current one and cvs diff'd, which coped a little better, but it still isn't too easy to see the delta. It's times like this I wish we did have a git tree. The only bits that jumped out at me were.. @@ -151,100 +312,103 @@ index a7d50a5..86e35cb 100644 + * we won't hit this branch next time around. + */ + if (print_fatal_signals >= 2) { -+ printk(KERN_ERR "#GPF fixup (%ld[seg:%lx]) at %08lx, CPU#%d.\n", ++ printk(KERN_ERR "#GFP fixup (%ld[seg:%lx]) at %08lx, CPU#%d.\n", + error_code, error_code/8, regs->ip, smp_processor_id()); It's a "general protection fault", so this seems wrong. + if (print_fatal_signals) { -+ printk(KERN_ERR "#GPF(%ld[seg:%lx]) at %08lx, CPU#%d.\n", error_code, -+ error_code/8, regs->ip, smp_processor_id()); ++ printk(KERN_ERR "#GFP(%ld[seg:%lx]) at %08lx, CPU#%d.\n", ++ error_code, error_code/8, regs->ip, smp_processor_id()); ditto. The rest of the interdiff makes my head hurt right now. Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk _______________________________________________ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list