[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTikb8rtSX5hQG6MQF4quymFUuh5Tw97TcpB0YfwS@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 18:50:57 +0200
From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, tj@...nel.org, npiggin@...nel.dk,
rientjes@...gle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] SLAB changes for v2.6.39-rc1
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2011, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
>> FYI, some sort of boot crash has snuck upstream in the last 24 hours:
>>
>> BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at ffff87ffc147e020
>> IP: [<ffffffff811aa762>] this_cpu_cmpxchg16b_emu+0x2/0x1c
>
> Hmmm.. This is the fallback code for the case that the processor does not
> support cmpxchg16b.
How does alternative_io() work? Does it require
alternative_instructions() to be executed. If so, the fallback code
won't be active when we enter kmem_cache_init(). Is there any reason
check_bugs() is called so late during boot? Can we do something like
the totally untested attached patch?
Download attachment "check-bugs.patch" of type "application/octet-stream" (537 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists