Re: Strange error?
Gene Heskett wrote: Greetings all; This line showed up in my log a couple of hours ago, several minutes removed from anything else I was doing at the time: rarian-sk-get-c[31855]: segfault at eip 00b7c153 esp bf9ddf0c error 4 The system acts and feels normal. Does anyone have a clue to loan me? I would ask the rarian developers: http://rarian.freedesktop.org/ My barely-educated guess is that Gnome was doing a routine re-index of its help files and and the app got bored and decided to dereference a NULL pointer for fun. Your desktop documentation index may be incomplete or corrupt. Try not to panic. -- Chris -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Strange error?
Greetings all; This line showed up in my log a couple of hours ago, several minutes removed from anything else I was doing at the time: rarian-sk-get-c[31855]: segfault at eip 00b7c153 esp bf9ddf0c error 4 The system acts and feels normal. Does anyone have a clue to loan me? Thanks. -- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Love is the triumph of imagination over intelligence. -- H. L. Mencken -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Strange error?
Greetings all; This line showed up in my log a couple of hours ago, several minutes removed from anything else I was doing at the time: rarian-sk-get-c[31855]: segfault at eip 00b7c153 esp bf9ddf0c error 4 The system acts and feels normal. Does anyone have a clue to loan me? Thanks. -- Cheers, Gene There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order. -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Love is the triumph of imagination over intelligence. -- H. L. Mencken -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Kernel 2.6.23-rc1: strange error messages in dmesg using a PS2 mouse
Hi Uwe, On 7/24/07, Uwe Bugla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi everybody, I am using kernel 2.6.23-rc1 with a Logitech PS2 mouse. Although the mouse is fully functionable the following strange error messages appear in dmesg: psmouse: Unknown symbol serio_reconnect psmouse: Unknown symbol serio_open psmouse: Unknown symbol serio_close psmouse: Unknown symbol __serio_register_driver psmouse: Unknown symbol serio_unregister_child_port psmouse: Unknown symbol serio_unregister_driver What is your .config? -- Dmitry - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Kernel 2.6.23-rc1: strange error messages in dmesg using a PS2 mouse
Hi Uwe, On 7/24/07, Uwe Bugla [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi everybody, I am using kernel 2.6.23-rc1 with a Logitech PS2 mouse. Although the mouse is fully functionable the following strange error messages appear in dmesg: psmouse: Unknown symbol serio_reconnect psmouse: Unknown symbol serio_open psmouse: Unknown symbol serio_close psmouse: Unknown symbol __serio_register_driver psmouse: Unknown symbol serio_unregister_child_port psmouse: Unknown symbol serio_unregister_driver What is your .config? -- Dmitry - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: STRANGE ERROR
On Sat, May 19, 2007 at 16:34 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Sun, 20 May 2007 00:30:55 +0200 "Sasa Ostrouska" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi everybody, > > > > I tried today to upgrade the kernel to 2.6.21.1 and i got the same > > error during the boot time. > > Here is the dmesg of the 2.6.20.2, can somebody tell me what this is ? > > > > ... > > > > Marvell 88E1101: Registered new driver > > Fixed PHY: Registered new driver > > driver_bound: device [EMAIL PROTECTED]:1 already bound > > I don't know what caused that one. > this is because of issue in fixed phy driver initialisation - have a patch but need to test it a bit more. > > Device '[EMAIL PROTECTED]:1' does not have a release() function, it is > > broken > > and must be fixed. > > BUG: at drivers/base/core.c:104 device_release() > > > > Call Trace: > > [] kobject_cleanup+0x53/0x7e > > [] kobject_release+0x0/0x9 > > [] kref_put+0x74/0x81 > > [] fixed_mdio_register_device+0x230/0x265 > > [] fixed_init+0x1f/0x35 > > [] init+0x147/0x2fb > > [] schedule_tail+0x36/0x92 > > [] child_rip+0xa/0x12 > > [] acpi_ds_init_one_object+0x0/0x83 > > [] init+0x0/0x2fb > > [] child_rip+0x0/0x12 > > This appears to have happened because fixed_mdio_register_device() (or > phy_device_create) didn't suitably initialise phy_device.dev. > > But I don't immediately see why this doesn't affect all phy drivers. > Presumably it's the fixed driver which is at fault. Jeff, how is this > supposed to work? > the fixed phy used to have "specific" bus bound stuff but I've reworked this point. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: STRANGE ERROR
On Sat, May 19, 2007 at 16:34 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: On Sun, 20 May 2007 00:30:55 +0200 Sasa Ostrouska [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi everybody, I tried today to upgrade the kernel to 2.6.21.1 and i got the same error during the boot time. Here is the dmesg of the 2.6.20.2, can somebody tell me what this is ? ... Marvell 88E1101: Registered new driver Fixed PHY: Registered new driver driver_bound: device [EMAIL PROTECTED]:1 already bound I don't know what caused that one. this is because of issue in fixed phy driver initialisation - have a patch but need to test it a bit more. Device '[EMAIL PROTECTED]:1' does not have a release() function, it is broken and must be fixed. BUG: at drivers/base/core.c:104 device_release() Call Trace: [802ec380] kobject_cleanup+0x53/0x7e [802ec3ab] kobject_release+0x0/0x9 [802ecf3f] kref_put+0x74/0x81 [8035493b] fixed_mdio_register_device+0x230/0x265 [80564d31] fixed_init+0x1f/0x35 [802071a4] init+0x147/0x2fb [80223b6e] schedule_tail+0x36/0x92 [8020a678] child_rip+0xa/0x12 [80311714] acpi_ds_init_one_object+0x0/0x83 [8020705d] init+0x0/0x2fb [8020a66e] child_rip+0x0/0x12 This appears to have happened because fixed_mdio_register_device() (or phy_device_create) didn't suitably initialise phy_device.dev. But I don't immediately see why this doesn't affect all phy drivers. Presumably it's the fixed driver which is at fault. Jeff, how is this supposed to work? the fixed phy used to have specific bus bound stuff but I've reworked this point. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: STRANGE ERROR
On Sun, 20 May 2007 00:30:55 +0200 "Sasa Ostrouska" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi everybody, > > I tried today to upgrade the kernel to 2.6.21.1 and i got the same > error during the boot time. > Here is the dmesg of the 2.6.20.2, can somebody tell me what this is ? > > ... > > Marvell 88E1101: Registered new driver > Fixed PHY: Registered new driver > driver_bound: device [EMAIL PROTECTED]:1 already bound I don't know what caused that one. > Device '[EMAIL PROTECTED]:1' does not have a release() function, it is broken > and must be fixed. > BUG: at drivers/base/core.c:104 device_release() > > Call Trace: > [] kobject_cleanup+0x53/0x7e > [] kobject_release+0x0/0x9 > [] kref_put+0x74/0x81 > [] fixed_mdio_register_device+0x230/0x265 > [] fixed_init+0x1f/0x35 > [] init+0x147/0x2fb > [] schedule_tail+0x36/0x92 > [] child_rip+0xa/0x12 > [] acpi_ds_init_one_object+0x0/0x83 > [] init+0x0/0x2fb > [] child_rip+0x0/0x12 This appears to have happened because fixed_mdio_register_device() (or phy_device_create) didn't suitably initialise phy_device.dev. But I don't immediately see why this doesn't affect all phy drivers. Presumably it's the fixed driver which is at fault. Jeff, how is this supposed to work? Thanks. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: STRANGE ERROR
On Sun, 20 May 2007 00:30:55 +0200 Sasa Ostrouska [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi everybody, I tried today to upgrade the kernel to 2.6.21.1 and i got the same error during the boot time. Here is the dmesg of the 2.6.20.2, can somebody tell me what this is ? ... Marvell 88E1101: Registered new driver Fixed PHY: Registered new driver driver_bound: device [EMAIL PROTECTED]:1 already bound I don't know what caused that one. Device '[EMAIL PROTECTED]:1' does not have a release() function, it is broken and must be fixed. BUG: at drivers/base/core.c:104 device_release() Call Trace: [802ec380] kobject_cleanup+0x53/0x7e [802ec3ab] kobject_release+0x0/0x9 [802ecf3f] kref_put+0x74/0x81 [8035493b] fixed_mdio_register_device+0x230/0x265 [80564d31] fixed_init+0x1f/0x35 [802071a4] init+0x147/0x2fb [80223b6e] schedule_tail+0x36/0x92 [8020a678] child_rip+0xa/0x12 [80311714] acpi_ds_init_one_object+0x0/0x83 [8020705d] init+0x0/0x2fb [8020a66e] child_rip+0x0/0x12 This appears to have happened because fixed_mdio_register_device() (or phy_device_create) didn't suitably initialise phy_device.dev. But I don't immediately see why this doesn't affect all phy drivers. Presumably it's the fixed driver which is at fault. Jeff, how is this supposed to work? Thanks. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
clone and waitpid syscall: return strange error
Help my please. Question about "interactive" clone and waitpid syscalls. Describe. Process was create five a process using clone syscall. Two clone calling with CLONE_THREAD, other three without CLONE_THREAD. After then process was calling waitpid(getpid, , __WNOTHREAD), then it must not checkout process, that was created by clone with CLONE_THREAD, is not it? Questions. Where define thread_info struct? Where define list_head struct? I right understand, that in kernel/fork.c, copy_process() function add process to thread group? //1171 string number list_add_tail_rcu(>thread_group, >group_leader->thread_group); And do_wait contain next_thread too, but waitpid(getpid(), , __WALL) it is good, but really waitpid syscall not return info about thread, because return error "no child process". I sure that is not right, or I delusion? I waiting from waitpid info about thread, but not error. Best regards, yantux. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
clone and waitpid syscall: return strange error
Help my please. Question about interactive clone and waitpid syscalls. Describe. Process was create five a process using clone syscall. Two clone calling with CLONE_THREAD, other three without CLONE_THREAD. After then process was calling waitpid(getpid, status, __WNOTHREAD), then it must not checkout process, that was created by clone with CLONE_THREAD, is not it? Questions. Where define thread_info struct? Where define list_head struct? I right understand, that in kernel/fork.c, copy_process() function add process to thread group? //1171 string number list_add_tail_rcu(p-thread_group, p-group_leader-thread_group); And do_wait contain next_thread too, but waitpid(getpid(), status, __WALL) it is good, but really waitpid syscall not return info about thread, because return error no child process. I sure that is not right, or I delusion? I waiting from waitpid info about thread, but not error. Best regards, yantux. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
