On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 04:38:38PM -0500, Kyle McMartin wrote:
 > execshield rebased against 2.6.28, merged by git and then fixed up
 > by hand.
 > 
 > build tested against x86-64 and pae/non-pae i386.
 > 
 > i'm uploading a scratch srpm but it will take a damned long time to
 > upload so i'll include the build id in a reply.

interdiff choked, so I moved your diff over the current one
and cvs diff'd, which coped a little better, but it still isn't
too easy to see the delta.  It's times like this I wish we
did have a git tree.

The only bits that jumped out at me were..

@@ -151,100 +312,103 @@ index a7d50a5..86e35cb 100644
 +               * we won't hit this branch next time around.
 +               */
 +              if (print_fatal_signals >= 2) {
-+                      printk(KERN_ERR "#GPF fixup (%ld[seg:%lx]) at %08lx, 
CPU#%d.\n",
++                      printk(KERN_ERR "#GFP fixup (%ld[seg:%lx]) at %08lx, 
CPU#%d.\n",
 +                              error_code, error_code/8, regs->ip, 
smp_processor_id());

It's a "general protection fault", so this seems wrong.

 +      if (print_fatal_signals) {
-+              printk(KERN_ERR "#GPF(%ld[seg:%lx]) at %08lx, CPU#%d.\n", 
error_code,
-+                      error_code/8, regs->ip, smp_processor_id());
++              printk(KERN_ERR "#GFP(%ld[seg:%lx]) at %08lx, CPU#%d.\n",
++                      error_code, error_code/8, regs->ip, smp_processor_id());

ditto.


The rest of the interdiff makes my head hurt right now.

        Dave

-- 
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk

_______________________________________________
Fedora-kernel-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list

Reply via email to