Hi; 05 Kas 2006 Paz 20:57 tarihinde, Andi Kleen şunları yazmıştı: > Can you test with "noreplacement" to make sure? I sorry for not to mention that, i tried noreplacement before reporting which is also ends up with same panic. > Anyways I suspect we're just getting back some variant of the old CPU setup > race. > > Normally CPU booting in Linux follows a special "cpu hotplug" state > machine, but for historical reasons i386 only implements one state of > this. At one point we had a similar bug (but not in the callback on CPU #0, > but in the timer on newly booted CPU). I don't see currently how it can > happen (but i haven't thought very deeply about it yet) > > Probably your timing is just unlucky on those simulators. Hmm, Novell bugzilla seems has similiar issues, https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=204647 and its duplicated ones gaves same or similiar panic outputs. > Previously we avoided converting i386 cpu bootup fully to the new state > machine because it is very fragile, but it's possible that there > is no other choice than to do it properly. Or maybe another kludge > is possible. Cheers -- S.Çağlar Onur <[email protected]> http://cekirdek.pardus.org.tr/~caglar/ Linux is like living in a teepee. No Windows, no Gates and an Apache in house!
Attachment:
pgpVC2bfVhgGt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [Opps] Invalid opcode
- From: Zachary Amsden <[email protected]>
- Re: [Opps] Invalid opcode
- References:
- [Opps] Invalid opcode
- From: "S.Çağlar Onur" <[email protected]>
- Re: [Opps] Invalid opcode
- From: "S.Çağlar Onur" <[email protected]>
- Re: [Opps] Invalid opcode
- From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
- [Opps] Invalid opcode
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sunrpc: add missing spin_unlock
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sunrpc: add missing spin_unlock
- Previous by thread: Re: [Opps] Invalid opcode
- Next by thread: Re: [Opps] Invalid opcode
- Index(es):
 |