On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 12:35 +0100, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> hi,
>
> James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Fri, 2008-10-24 at 09:05 +0200, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> >> hi,
> >>
> >> inserting a Verbatim 4GB USB stick in a ep9307 based device running
> >> kernel 2.6.27 results in the following Oops:
> >>
> >> [42949395.050000] usb 1-3: new full speed USB device using ep93xx-ohci
> >> and address 2
> >> [42949395.250000] usb 1-3: configuration #1 chosen from 1 choice
> >> [42949395.260000] scsi0 : SCSI emulation for USB Mass Storage devices
> >> [42949395.270000] usb 1-3: New USB device found, idVendor=13fe,
> >> idProduct=1f23
> >> [42949395.280000] usb 1-3: New USB device strings: Mfr=1, Product=2,
> >> SerialNumber=3
> >> [42949395.280000] usb 1-3: Product: STORE N GO
> >> [42949395.300000] usb 1-3: Manufacturer: Verbatim
> >> [42949395.310000] usb 1-3: SerialNumber: 078813D90478
> >> [42949400.280000] Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at
> >> virtual address 00000003
> >> [42949400.280000] pgd = c0648000
> >> [42949400.300000] [00000003] *pgd=c0647031, *pte=00000000, *ppte=00000000
> >> [42949400.300000] Internal error: Oops: 13 [#1] PREEMPT
> >> [42949400.300000] Modules linked in:
> >> [42949400.300000] CPU: 0 Not tainted (2.6.27 #3)
> >> [42949400.300000] PC is at scsi_calculate_bounce_limit+0x3c/0x44
> >
> > Best guess is this line:
> >
> > if (host_dev && host_dev->dma_mask)
> > bounce_limit = *host_dev->dma_mask;
> >
> > I'd guess host_dev->dma_mask contains 0x3 ... could this be some sort of
> > ARM setup problem?
>
> thanks for having a look!
>
> i could figure out the difference between 2.6.26.3 and 2.6.27 that
> triggers the Oops:
>
> diff -u linux-2.6.26.3/include/asm-arm/pci.h
> linux-2.6.27/arch/arm/include/asm/pci.h
>
> ...
> @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@
> * The networking and block device layers use this boolean for bounce
> * buffer decisions.
> */
> -#define PCI_DMA_BUS_IS_PHYS (0)
> +#define PCI_DMA_BUS_IS_PHYS (1)
>
> /*
> * Whether pci_unmap_{single,page} is a nop depends upon the
> ...
>
> this change affects the following piece of code in
> scsi_calculate_bounce_limit():
>
> if (!PCI_DMA_BUS_IS_PHYS)
> return BLK_BOUNCE_ANY;
>
> host_dev = scsi_get_device(shost);
> if (host_dev && host_dev->dma_mask)
> bounce_limit = *host_dev->dma_mask;
>
>
> host_dev->dma_mask is 0xffffffff and we try to dereference the pointer
So the host_dev is some type of arm platform device? If so, it's got
it's dma_mask set up wrongly. it's a pointer in struct device and is
supposed to point to the real u64 quantity located within the actual
enclosing device.
James
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
