Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 21:08:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 21:08:54 -0400 Received: from leibniz.math.psu.edu ([146.186.130.2]:16560 "EHLO math.psu.edu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 21:08:52 -0400 Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 21:14:25 -0400 (EDT) From: Alexander Viro To: Linus Torvalds cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: oops in bk pull (oct 03) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1175 Lines: 30 On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Fri, 4 Oct 2002, Alexander Viro wrote: > > > > Hell knows. The only explanation I see (and that's not worth much) is that > > we somehow confuse the chipset and get crapped on something like next cache > > miss. > > I don't see any better explanation right now, so I guess we just revert > that thing. > > The only other notion I might come up with is stack corruption, ie the > code in pci_read_bases() might corrupt the return stack subtly (it does > add another local variable whose address is taken), causing a jump to a > random address on return. Compiler bug? I doubt it. I've read through the objdump output and code looks OK. Diff between old and new _definitely_ looks sane. FWIW, chipset is Via 686A, gcc is from debian-stable (2.95.4-11woody1). I'll try to find some RH box and build with the same .config, but I would be surprised if it changes anything. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/