Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750764AbWCYSgm (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 Mar 2006 13:36:42 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750754AbWCYSgm (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 Mar 2006 13:36:42 -0500 Received: from adsl-71-140-189-62.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net ([71.140.189.62]:11484 "EHLO aexorsyst.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750764AbWCYSgl (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 Mar 2006 13:36:41 -0500 From: "John Z. Bohach" Reply-To: jzb@aexorsyst.com To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: mem= causes oops (was Re: BIOS causes (exposes?) modprobe (load_module) kernel oops) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2006 10:36:40 -0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.2 References: <200603212005.58274.jzb@aexorsyst.com> <200603240936.13178.jzb@aexorsyst.com> <20060324163237.5743bd3c.rdunlap@xenotime.net> In-Reply-To: <20060324163237.5743bd3c.rdunlap@xenotime.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200603251036.40379.jzb@aexorsyst.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1706 Lines: 39 On Friday 24 March 2006 16:32, Randy.Dunlap wrote: > > Here it is: > > > > fails with cmdline: > > > > Kernel command line: ro root=/dev/sda1 rootdelay=10 mem=0x200M > > console=ttyS0,115200n8 > > > > works with: > > > > Kernel command line: ro root=/dev/sda1 rootdelay=10 > > console=ttyS0,115200n8 > > > > Note the "mem=" being the differentiator! > > OK, that is memory map difference. > > Can you test a more recent kernel to see if it has the same problem? > (like 2.6.16 or 2.6.16-git9) No luck, or difference, for that matter. 2.6.16 behaves identically. I'm trying a few different options, such as disabling MSI/MSI-X support, because what I've seen is that it all works fine with it as long as the h/w has MSI support, but in all the case I've seen fail, the common denominator is no MSI (and also all ICH4 platforms). The cases where I can't make it fail is where the h/w has MSI support. One other noteworthy difference is that the failures all occur on Intel graphics chipsets, while the successes are non-graphics. Still trying to find out whether the failure follows graphics or the ICH4. Anyway, what would help me is if someone could tell me if the page fault is a normal and expected code path by design, in order to page in the area setup by __vmalloc_area() as triggered by the module_alloc() call. I'd really rather not have to trace through the page fault handler to identify the difference between success/failure unless I have to. - 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/