Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756051AbYCCRrO (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Mar 2008 12:47:14 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750851AbYCCRq4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Mar 2008 12:46:56 -0500 Received: from gprs189-60.eurotel.cz ([160.218.189.60]:50726 "EHLO gprs189-60.eurotel.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750699AbYCCRqz (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Mar 2008 12:46:55 -0500 Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 18:47:24 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: "Klaus S. Madsen" , Suspend-devel list , Ingo Molnar , LKML , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Thomas Gleixner , mjg59@srcf.ucam.org Subject: Re: Regression in 2.6.25-rc3: s2ram segfaults before suspending Message-ID: <20080303174724.GC13869@elf.ucw.cz> References: <20080228192404.GH17932@hjernemadsen.org> <47C70C01.4020605@zytor.com> <20080228194920.GJ17932@hjernemadsen.org> <47C739A6.5020608@zytor.com> <20080229070028.GK17932@hjernemadsen.org> <47C873AA.6040305@zytor.com> <20080229212654.GL27212@elte.hu> <20080301094525.GQ17932@hjernemadsen.org> <20080303121735.GE28369@elf.ucw.cz> <47CC310B.8000305@zytor.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <47CC310B.8000305@zytor.com> X-Warning: Reading this can be dangerous to your mental health. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1278 Lines: 29 On Mon 2008-03-03 09:10:35, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Pavel Machek wrote: >>> >>> The only thing I don't understand is why this is suddenly a problem with >>> 2.6.25, and not with 2.6.24? Is there a bug in 2.6.24 and previously >>> that allows real-mode execution of non-executable pages? >> >> It is strange indeed... Should it be traced as an regression? > > I'd like to understand what the heck happened, but as far as we can observe > right now, it's a *progression*, not a regression, since executing out of a > non-PROT_EXEC area isn't *supposed* to work... Okay, I guess this depends on the eye of the beholder... because s2ram *is* supposed to work ;-). Ideally, I'd like to keep 2.6.24 behaviour for at least a while, so we can try to fix the libx86 out there or something... Pavel PS: Matthew, there's problem in libx86: it tries to execute from area not marked as PROT_EXEC. -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- 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/