[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4863DF32.50105@goop.org>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 11:25:54 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
Stephen Tweedie <sct@...hat.com>,
Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@...hat.com>,
Mark McLoughlin <markmc@...hat.com>,
Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00 of 36] x86/paravirt: groundwork for 64-bit Xen support
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org> wrote:
>
>
>>> It quickly broke the build in testing:
>>>
>>> include/asm/pgalloc.h: In function ‘paravirt_pgd_free':
>>> include/asm/pgalloc.h:14: error: parameter name omitted
>>> arch/x86/kernel/entry_64.S: In file included from
>>> arch/x86/kernel/traps_64.c:51:include/asm/pgalloc.h: In function
>>> ‘paravirt_pgd_free':
>>> include/asm/pgalloc.h:14: error: parameter name omitted
>>>
>>>
>> No, looks like my fault. The non-PARAVIRT version of
>> paravirt_pgd_free() is:
>>
>> static inline void paravirt_pgd_free(struct mm_struct *mm, pgd_t *) {}
>>
>> but C doesn't like missing parameter names, even if unused.
>>
>> This should fix it:
>>
>
> that fixed the build but now we've got a boot crash with this config:
>
> time.c: Detected 2010.304 MHz processor.
> spurious 8259A interrupt: IRQ7.
> BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 0000000000000000
> IP: [<0000000000000000>]
> PGD 0
> Thread overran stack, or stack corrupted
> Oops: 0010 [1] SMP
> CPU 0
>
What stage during boot? I'm seeing an initrd problem, but that's
relatively late.
J
--
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