linux-kernel - Re: acpi_ex_system_memory_space

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:	Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:18:37 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
To:	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
Cc:	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@...el.com>,
	Bob Moore <robert.moore@...el.com>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: acpi_ex_system_memory_space_handler oops

> Kernel oopses on early boot stages (boots normally with boot_delay=10).

> rc5-git8

Please find which kernel this failure starts in.
Start by testing 2.6.30.stable so we can tell
if this is a regression in the current RC.

What is the difference between the two dmesg?
they have the same cmdline, neither has boot_delay,
and neither dmesg shows the oops.

The fact that boot_delay=10 makes the problem go away
suggests some sort of race condition.  Is 10 the smallest
value of printk_time that works, or is it a random value?

Do you still see the oops with CONFIG_PRINTK_TIME=n?

Do you still see the oops with maxcpus=1?

Do you still see the oops with "acpi_serialize=1"?

Please open a bug report here:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=ACPI

answer the questions above and attach the output from acpidump

thanks,
-Len Brown, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/