On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 01:11:36AM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote: > On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 12:58 AM, Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> firmware_map_add_early() is using bootmem for the allocation. So yes, > >> I guess it should possible to use kobjects here. That said, this code > >> is in fact fairly recent: > >> > >> commit 69ac9cd629ca96e59f34eb4ccd12d00b2c8276a7 > >> Author: Bernhard Walle <bwalle@xxxxxxx> > >> Date: Fri Jun 27 13:12:54 2008 +0200 > >> > >> sysfs: add /sys/firmware/memmap > >> > >> I'll add the Cc. I still have a feeling that the kobject patch should > >> expect to run even when slab is not available. > > > > I never has been expected to do so in the past, so odds are, lots of > > things might break :( > > Yeah. Maybe you should withdraw your ack? :-D > > Signed-off-by: Bernhard Walle <bwalle@xxxxxxx> > Acked-by: Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxx> > Acked-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@xxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: kexec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Cc: yhlu.kernel@xxxxxxxxx > Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> Heh, I didn't realize that this ran so early in the boot process, the code logically looks correct :) > I'm sorry for having been a bit rash earlier -- it's the combination > of the patches that produce the failure; they both seem okay on their > own. On the other hand, this is what -next is for, isn't it? Yup. > Maybe the firmware memmap code can simply run a little later in the > boot sequence? Possibly. I wonder why this is only a problem on your machine and not on anything that Ingo tested? thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-testers" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
