[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090821133553.GE10263@elte.hu>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 15:35:53 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...fujitsu.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: fix system die when load with "reservetop"
parameter
* Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> The system will die if the kernel is booted with "reservetop"
> parameter, in present code, parse "reservetop" parameter after
> early_ioremap_init(), and some function still use early_ioremap()
> after it.
btw., what are you using the 'reservetop' boot option for?
> The problem is, "reservetop" parameter can modify 'FIXADDR_TOP',
> then the virtual address got by early_ioremap() is base on old
> 'FIXADDR_TOP', but the page mapping is base on new 'FIXADDR_TOP',
> it will occur page fault, and the IDT is not prepare yet, so, the
> system is dead.
>
> So, put parse_early_param() in the front of early_ioremap_init()
> in this patch.
>
> Signed-off-by: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...fujitsu.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/setup.c | 10 +++++-----
> 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
Does this bug trigger in 2.6.30 too?
I'm quite nervous about doing this change so late in the .31 cycle,
we've got a hundred early parameters that now get executed much
earlier than before. No way can i test all of them and others
testing it (like in your case) takes time to trickle through.
So unless this is a .31 regression i'd be inclined to queue it up
for .32.
Ingo
--
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