On August 25, 2016 4:45:06 AM PDT, Borislav Petkov <[email protected]> wrote: >On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 03:05:19AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> I'm wondering if one of those 23 invocations sets up some kind of >> corrupt data that continues to get used. > >That could be one plausible explanation. Look at what calls >__sw_hweight64: > >initmem_init >numa_policy_init >page_writeback_init >paging_init >pcpu_embed_first_chunk >pcpu_setup_first_chunk >sched_init >set_rq_online.part.46 >setup_arch >setup_per_cpu_areas >update_sysctl >x86_64_start_kernel >x86_64_start_reservations >x86_numa_init >zone_sizes_init > >I could very well imagine per CPU areas or some sched structure or >whatever getting silently corrupted. > >Thanks.
Either way, I think we can conclude that we probably did catch a real problem. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse brevity and formatting.
