On 6/11/08, Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-06-11 at 23:26 +0530, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
> > Hi Andrew,
> >
> > The 2.6.26-rc5-mm2 kernel panic's, while booting up on the x86_64
> > box with the attached .config file.
>
>
> Just to save everyone the trouble, it looks like this is a new BUG_ON().
>
>
> http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.26-rc5/2.6.26-rc5-mm2/broken-out/fix-x86_64-splat.patch
>
> The machine in question is a single-node machine, but with
> CONFIG_NUMA=y.
>
Yes. Sorry, I already responded in a separate e-mail (see below), but
that obviously missed all the Ccs. So here it goes again...:
I'm betting
commit a953e4597abd51b74c99e0e3b7074532a60fd031
Author: Mike Travis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon May 12 21:21:12 2008 +0200
sched: replace MAX_NUMNODES with nr_node_ids in kernel/sched.c
will fix this if it's not in -mm2 already.
The BUG() is simply there to prevent silent corruption. Mike already
has a patch that changes it to a WARN(), but it obviously didn't get
through (either)...
Vegard
On 6/11/08, Vegard Nossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 6/9/08, Kamalesh Babulal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi Andrew,
> >
> > The 2.6.26-rc5-mm2 kernel panic's, while booting up on the x86_64
> > box with the attached .config file.
>
> (Please apologize for the strange way of replying to this message. It
> seems that LKML gave up delivering to my address, so I'm currently
> reading off lkml.org.)
>
> This should already be fixed, but Andrew refused to apply the patch
> before releasing the -mm1 (and -mm2 apparently). I'm attaching the
> patch, can you see if it helps?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> Vegard
--
"The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while
the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it
disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation."
-- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036
