[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0804231202250.15173@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 12:05:01 -0700 (PDT)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Zdenek Kabelac <zdenek.kabelac@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au
Subject: Re: 2.6.25-git2: BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at
ffffffffffffffff
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> fault = check_bytes(start + length, POISON_INUSE, remainder);
fault == NULL if the check was successful. Otherwise it contains the first
address that does not match our expectations.
> if (!fault)
> return 1;
> while (end > fault && end[-1] == POISON_INUSE)
> end--;
>
> slab_err(s, page, "Padding overwritten. 0x%p-0x%p", fault, end - 1);
>
> So how come we're printing out 'fault' as zero and 'end' at 4 GB? Christoph?
We should have returned from the function and not printed this message. If
we somehow skipped the test for !fault then end could have wrapped around
which gets us to 4GB.
--
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