[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 16:27:05 -0200
From: Glauber de Oliveira Costa <gcosta@...hat.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
glommer@...il.com, tglx@...utronix.de, ehabkost@...hat.com,
jeremy@...p.org, avi@...ranet.com, anthony@...emonkey.ws,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
ak@...e.de, chrisw@...s-sol.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
hpa@...or.com, zach@...are.com, roland@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/19] desc_struct integration
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
>
>>>> Ingo, in the absense of further complaints, could you please push
>>>> to the x86 tree?
>>> yeah, i've added them.
>> the patches cause a spontaneous reboot on x86 64-bit, around the time
>> when bootup hits user-space. It's due to one of the 25 patches from
>> you today. Config attached.
>
> likely caused by this patch:
>
> Subject: unify non-paravirt parts of desc.h
>
> _please_ be more careful when unifying. Do check the before/after
> vmlinux - the binary size at least. And watch out for compiler warnings
> as well:
>
> arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c: In function 'read_32bit_tls':
> arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c:454: warning: passing argument 1 of 'get_desc_base' from incompatible pointer type
I saw this warning, and this was fixed in the patch that follows. But
yeah, I could have done a separate one, to avoid it. Do you have any
other reason to believe this is the cause?
My box booted fine with the changes, but I'm re-verifying, and will send
and update soon.
> i've pulled the patches from the tree for now.
Ok, I'll investigate it, meanwhile.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists