Re: [Patch] min_low_pfn and max_low_pfn calcultion fix

From: Jay Lan <jlan_at_sgi.com>
Date: 2007-03-15 02:27:35
Magnus Damm wrote:
[snip]
>>
>> I tested on 2.6.21-rc3 with DEBUG_VM turned on. The vanilla 2.6.21-rc3
>> without Nan-hai's patch, panicked on bugcheck on free_initmem->free_page
>> as predicted. We still need this patch.
> 
> Ok, thanks for testing. =)
> 
>> However, the zero-size vmcore problem is back on SN. But that is a
>> dfiffernet problem.
> 
> Argh, more problems...

I found the problem. It was the "elfcorehdr" introduced in 2.6.21-rc1.
Without specifying it, the elfcorehdr_addr is initialized to
ELFCORE_ADDR_MAX. Later, a check in reserve_elfcorehdr will fail:
        if (elfcorehdr_addr >= ELFCORE_ADDR_MAX)
                return -EINVAL;

Is it supposed to be a physical address to store elf core header?
If so, it is not possible for SN to provide a physical address at
boot time, just like in the case of crashkernel=X@Y where Y is not used.

Thanks,
 - jay


> 
> / magnus
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Received on Thu Mar 15 02:32:39 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2007-03-15 02:32:54 EST