On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 05:05:37PM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Meelis, can you please apply the following patch before & after the
> offending commit, boot with "memblock=debug" added as kernel param and
> post the boot log? The patch will generate some offset warnings after
> the commit but should work fine.
>
> Sam, David, as I'm not familiar with the code base, is it possible to
> tell which address is corrupted (zeroed, it seems)? ie. can we add
> "if (XXX == NULL) printk("%p is corrputed\n"...);" somewhere?
No idea - sorry. I spend most of the time with sparc32 - which I
do not even feel familiar with yet :-(
One thing I noticed while working with memblock for sparc32 (*) is that allocations
are done top-down. So we may end up allocatng memory with a considerably higher
address than we are used to.
This is obviously just a wild guess...
Meelis - do the affected boxes have any special memory configurations?
Could you try to boot with a sensible mem=xxx value to see if limiting the memory
helps.
(*) I have re-done the original patch-set and I have a quite good feeling about it.
HIGHMEM support is outstanding - I got a bit confused when I looked at x86.
But my ss5 crashes the first time I try to use the allocated memory -
so I assume I have some silly issue somewhere. Nothing points at memblock
in this case.
Sam
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
