linux-kernel - Re: [BUG] 2.6.25-rc5-mm1 kernel panic with "Exception: 501 " on powerpc

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 13 Mar 2008 09:26:09 +1100
From:	Michael Ellerman <michael@...erman.id.au>
To:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [BUG] 2.6.25-rc5-mm1 kernel panic with "Exception: 501 " on
	powerpc

On Wed, 2008-03-12 at 11:51 -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 10:46:45AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 18:25:37 +0530 Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > Beats me.  Maybe we're still enabling interrupts too early.  But the new
> > semaphore code got fixed (didn't it?)
> 
> On the 7th, according to my records.  Easy to check -- look in
> kernel/semaphore.c and see whether down() is using spin_lock_irqsave
> (good) or spin_lock_irq (bad).

down() looks OK, but there's still a spin_lock_irq() in __down_common(),
although I don't know if it makes sense for us to be in __down() at that
stage.

cheers

-- 
Michael Ellerman
OzLabs, IBM Australia Development Lab

wwweb: http://michael.ellerman.id.au
phone: +61 2 6212 1183 (tie line 70 21183)

We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors,
we borrow it from our children. - S.M.A.R.T Person

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (190 bytes)