On Mon, 2012-03-05 at 10:54 -0500, Don Zickus wrote: > This is one way of doing this. I was trying to avoid this when I rewrote the > nmi handlers, because everyone kept screwing up the structs. I thought it > would be safer to have callers pass in data based on an api instead. Apparently kmemcheck marks pages as non-present and does magic in the fault handler. Having the action thing allocated meant kmemcheck also marks that thing as non-present in the page-tables, the list iteration from NMI context would then fault and things would go funny. There's two ways out, help kmemcheck with a new annotation (which of course starts with checking if there isn't already such a thing). Or this one, avoid the action things from being allocated, this side-steps kmemcheck and avoids the problem thusly. Sadly this patch doesn't at all mention the first possibility and why that isn't a feasible approach. A well... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
