On Fri, 2 May 2008 11:11:13 +0100, Ralf Baechle <ralf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> It came as part of 39b8d5254246ac56342b72f812255c8f7a74dca9 which is a
> patch amalgated from several other patches. Below is the original patch
> it came with. I think the idea of the patch is valid but the idea needs a
> bit of mending.
Then how about this fix?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [PATCH] Fix detection of kernel segment on 64-bit
Signed-off-by: Atsushi Nemoto <anemo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
diff --git a/arch/mips/kernel/traps.c b/arch/mips/kernel/traps.c
index cb8b0e2..7893bb3 100644
--- a/arch/mips/kernel/traps.c
+++ b/arch/mips/kernel/traps.c
@@ -78,6 +78,19 @@ void (*board_nmi_handler_setup)(void);
void (*board_ejtag_handler_setup)(void);
void (*board_bind_eic_interrupt)(int irq, int regset);
+static inline int kernel_unmapped_seg(void *addr)
+{
+ unsigned long a = (unsigned long)addr;
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_32BIT
+ /* KSEG0 or KSEG1 */
+ return (a & 0xc0000000) == KSEG0;
+#else
+ /* CKSEG0, CKSEG1 or XKPHYS */
+ return ((a & 0xffffffffc0000000L) == CKSEG0) ||
+ ((a & 0xc000000000000000L) == XKPHYS);
+#endif
+}
static void show_raw_backtrace(unsigned long reg29)
{
@@ -88,8 +101,7 @@ static void show_raw_backtrace(unsigned long reg29)
#ifdef CONFIG_KALLSYMS
printk("\n");
#endif
-#define IS_KVA01(a) ((((unsigned int)a) & 0xc0000000) == 0x80000000)
- if (IS_KVA01(sp)) {
+ if (kernel_unmapped_seg(sp)) {
while (!kstack_end(sp)) {
addr = *sp++;
if (__kernel_text_address(addr))
