From: BlaisorBlade <bla...@ya...> - 2004-02-22 15:29:17
|
Alle 22:04, venerd=EC 20 febbraio 2004, Christopher S. Aker ha scritto: > Hello, > > I've been testing 2.6 and SKAS and receive the following BUG on both 2.6.2 > and 2.6.3. Patches applied are (in order): > > * > http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade/patches/2.6.2-v1/uml-patch-2= =2E6 >.2-0.bz2 * > http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade/patches/2.6.2-v1/00-Combo-v1= =2Eb >z2 * > http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade/patches/2.6.2-v1-host-skas2/= 00 >-2.6.2-v1-host-SKAS2.patch.bz2 Yes, this is the right order - this means that maybe I could explain it=20 properly, this time (a huge number of people said that my instructions were= =20 confusing, and probably they are right). * the CFQ patch from the -mm tree > * patch-2.6.3 (only on the 2.6.3 kernel, obviously) > > kernel BUG at include/asm/mmu_context.h:53! > invalid operand: 0000 [#1] > CPU: 2 > EIP: 0060:[<c011dff1>] Not tainted > EFLAGS: 00010083 > EIP is at schedule+0x53e/0x6c5 > eax: 00000100 ebx: f57e0d00 ecx: 00000002 edx: f57e0d00 > esi: f640c6b0 edi: c3da1c80 ebp: f7f97f78 esp: f7f97f24 > ds: 007b es: 007b ss: 0068 > Process swapper (pid: 0, threadinfo=3Df7f96000 task=3Df7f9ece0) > Stack: f640c6b0 3ee9c9d5 00000185 f7f97f30 e3cd6000 00000200 00000001 > c0451b88 f640c6b0 3ee9c9d5 00000185 f640c6b0 c3da1c80 0001ab57 3ee9cded > 00000185 f7f9ece0 f7f9eeac f7f96000 f7f96000 c010882e f7f96000 c010ac89 > f7f96000 Call Trace: > [<c010882e>] default_idle+0x0/0x2d > [<c010ac89>] need_resched+0x27/0x32 > [<c010882e>] default_idle+0x0/0x2d > [<c0108858>] default_idle+0x2a/0x2d > [<c01088cc>] cpu_idle+0x37/0x40 > [<c012314e>] printk+0x188/0x1d0 > [<c045c51d>] print_cpu_info+0x86/0xd2 > > Code: 0f 0b 35 00 34 3a 3a c0 eb c5 89 5e 6c f0 ff 43 18 b8 00 e0 > > Does this look like it could be caused by the SKAS patches, or would you > suspect the CFQ patch? The box seems to run fine, but once I fire up a f= ew > UMLs and start banging around, the host will BUG. Ok. It is very probably the 2.6 Skas patch (I've not looked at the CFQ patc= h,=20 but it seems very unlikely that it can cause such problems). You are probab= ly=20 the first one who tries it with CONFIG_SMP enabled: look at=20 include/asm-i386/mmu_context.h to see this code: #ifdef CONFIG_SMP else { cpu_tlbstate[cpu].state =3D TLBSTATE_OK; BUG_ON(cpu_tlbstate[cpu].active_mm !=3D next); /*!!!!This i= s the=20 bug you hit*/ =2E.. So you have enabled CONFIG_SMP, right? In that situation the code above nee= ds=20 to be changed - I need some more thinking to understand what must be done. Actually, I've not yet understood how the skas patch can make that test fai= l -=20 so it could be innocent. If you want to use SKAS now, you could, as a workaround, disable CONFIG_SMP= ,=20 if you have just one HyperThreading processor. If you cannot, just wait. =2D-=20 Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade Linux registered user n. 292729 |