Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> "Smith, Stan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> I have been wrestling with this same "Invalid memory segment 0x92000
>> - 95000" error
>
> This one is probably implementation foolishness, (trying to putt
> something at 0x90000 when it is not available. Can you post
> /proc/iomem I
> suspect you will find something in that range.
# kboot-10 on 2.6.18 kernel.
# cat /proc/iomem
00000000-0009f7ff : System RAM
00000000-00000000 : Crash kernel
0009f800-0009ffff : reserved
000a0000-000bffff : Video RAM area
000c0000-000ca7ff : Video ROM
000ca800-000cb7ff : Adapter ROM
000cb800-000cc7ff : Adapter ROM
000f0000-000fffff : System ROM
00100000-7ffdffff : System RAM
00100000-002ade02 : Kernel code
002ade03-0031c58f : Kernel data
7ffe0000-7ffeefff : ACPI Tables
7ffef000-7fffdbff : ACPI Non-volatile Storage
7fffdc00-7fffffff : reserved
88000000-880fffff : PCI Bus #05
88000000-8801ffff : 0000:05:0c.0
88100000-881003ff : 0000:00:1f.1
dd800000-ddffffff : PCI Bus #04
dd800000-ddffffff : 0000:04:00.0
dd800000-ddffffff : ib_mthca
debfec00-debfefff : 0000:00:1d.7
debfec00-debfefff : ehci_hcd
debff000-debfffff : 0000:00:01.0
dec00000-dedfffff : PCI Bus #01
decfe000-decfefff : 0000:01:00.1
decff000-decfffff : 0000:01:00.3
ded00000-dedfffff : PCI Bus #03
deda0000-dedbffff : 0000:03:04.0
deda0000-dedbffff : e1000
dede0000-dedfffff : 0000:03:04.1
dede0000-dedfffff : e1000
dee00000-deefffff : PCI Bus #04
dee00000-deefffff : 0000:04:00.0
dee4d74c-dee4d74f : ib_mthca
dee80680-dee8069b : ib_mthca
dee82a50-dee82a8f : ib_mthca
dee8a000-dee8a0ff : ib_mthca
deef00d8-deef00df : ib_mthca
def00000-dfffffff : PCI Bus #05
defff000-deffffff : 0000:05:0c.0
df000000-dfffffff : 0000:05:0c.0
fec00000-fec85fff : reserved
fee00000-fee00fff : reserved
ffc00000-ffffffff : reserved
>
>> Debug so far has the bzImage segment[0].bufsz being 10 bytes less
>> than what the same code compiled/running on x86(i686) reports.
>> bzImage segment[1].bufsz is 64 bytes greater than what x86 reports.
>> Initially suspected uClibc problem, when uClibc was replaced with
>> GNU libc, same failure?
>>
>> Using native built (x86_64) kexec-tools-1.101, 2.6.18 kernel, REL4.u4
>> the problem does not occur?
>
> Odd.
>
> It is clearly time for a little more maintenance here.
>
> Eric
_______________________________________________
fastboot mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/fastboot
