Re: unaligned accesses in SLAB etc.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> From: David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 16:20:01 -0400 (EDT)
> 
> > So I'm going to audit all the code paths to make sure we don't put garbage
> > into the fault_code value.
> 
> There are two code paths where we can put garbage into the fault_code
> value.  And for the dtlb_prot.S case, the value we put in there is
> TLB_TAG_ACCESS which is 0x30, which include bit 0x20 which is that
> FAULT_CODE_BAD_RA indication which is erroneously triggering.
> 
> The other path is via hugepage TLB misses, for the situation where
> we haven't allocated the huge TSB for the thread yet.  That might
> explain some other longer-term problems we've had.
> 
> I'm about to test the following fix:

Thank you - it seems to work fine for me on E3500 on top of 
3.17.0-07551-g052db7e + slab alignment fix.

However, on top of mainline HEAD 3.17.0-09670-g0429fbc it explodes with 
scheduler BUG - just reported to LKML + sched maintainers.

-- 
Meelis Roos (mroos@xxxxxxxx)

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>




[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]