On Sat, Nov 01, 2003 at 01:28:27PM +0200, tuija wrote:
Hi,

I tried new kernel and found these on dmesg!
Do anybody have any idea what might cause
them ?
Despite of those kernel seems to work?
uname -r
2.6.0-0.test9.2mdk

i have similar messages but with a different call trace
Debug: sleeping function called from invalid context at mm/slab.c:1856
in_atomic():1, irqs_disabled():0
Call Trace:
[__might_sleep+154/192] __might_sleep+0x9a/0xc0
[__kmalloc+134/144] __kmalloc+0x86/0x90
[acpi_os_allocate+16/20] acpi_os_allocate+0x10/0x14
[acpi_ut_callocate+99/202] acpi_ut_callocate+0x63/0xca
[acpi_ut_callocate_and_track+29/124] acpi_ut_callocate_and_track+0x1d/0x7c
[acpi_ns_internalize_name+132/240] acpi_ns_internalize_name+0x84/0xf0
[acpi_ns_evaluate_relative+100/376] acpi_ns_evaluate_relative+0x64/0x178
[handle_IRQ_event+51/96] handle_IRQ_event+0x33/0x60
[acpi_ut_trace+41/43] acpi_ut_trace+0x29/0x2b
[acpi_evaluate_object+359/591] acpi_evaluate_object+0x167/0x24f
[acpi_ec_gpe_query+277/303] acpi_ec_gpe_query+0x115/0x12f
[acpi_ev_gpe_dispatch+126/437] acpi_ev_gpe_dispatch+0x7e/0x1b5
[acpi_ev_gpe_detect+259/327] acpi_ev_gpe_detect+0x103/0x147
[acpi_ev_sci_xrupt_handler+56/79] acpi_ev_sci_xrupt_handler+0x38/0x4f
[acpi_irq+15/26] acpi_irq+0xf/0x1a
[handle_IRQ_event+51/96] handle_IRQ_event+0x33/0x60
[acpi_irq+0/26] acpi_irq+0x0/0x1a
[do_IRQ+163/352] do_IRQ+0xa3/0x160
[common_interrupt+24/32] common_interrupt+0x18/0x20
[system_call+0/48] system_call+0x0/0x30

L.

--
Luca Berra -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
       Communication Media & Services S.r.l.
/"\
\ /     ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN
 X        AGAINST HTML MAIL
/ \



Reply via email to