Hi Andrew,
This patch has been generated against 2.6.11-rc2-mm2. This fixes a very
minor bug in kexec.
Thanks
Vivek
Vivek Goyal wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> This patch has been generated against 2.6.11-rc2-mm2. This fixes a very
> minor bug in kexec.
Have you run sparse on a kexec-patched kernel tree?
I have, but not lately. It needed some s/0/NULL/ in several places,
but that was before the latest big changes...
> diff -puN include/linux/kexec.h~kexec_minor_bug_fix include/linux/kexec.h
> --- linux-2.6.11-rc2-mm2-kdump/include/linux/kexec.h~kexec_minor_bug_fix 2005-02-02 16:28:18.000000000 +0530
> +++ linux-2.6.11-rc2-mm2-kdump-vivek/include/linux/kexec.h 2005-02-02 16:29:01.000000000 +0530
> @@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ struct kimage {
> unsigned long control_page;
>
> /* Flags to indicate special processing */
> - int type : 1;
> + unsigned int type : 1;
--
~Randy
"Randy.Dunlap" <[email protected]> writes:
> Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > Hi Andrew,
> > This patch has been generated against 2.6.11-rc2-mm2. This fixes a very
> > minor bug in kexec.
>
> Have you run sparse on a kexec-patched kernel tree?
> I have, but not lately. It needed some s/0/NULL/ in several places,
> but that was before the latest big changes...
I have been avoiding adding more but I have not done had a flag
day and killed them all either.
The one bit int bug was a stupid thinko in the new code.
Totally obvious when someone tried it, to use it.
I think I am about ready to provide a sysrq panic interface.
At least for testing that code path it would be good. And
if we actually have kernel core dumps it might be useful
beyond that.
Eric