Unbalanced stack usage in arch/i386/math-emu/wm_sqrt.S

Originally sent to the maintainer of the i386 math-emu code ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) but that mail was bounced[1]. Is anybody maintaining the math-emu code and do we even care about it anymore? I am doing static code analysis on the kernel and have found a stack imbalance in arch/i386/math-emu/wm_sqrt

Re: [PATCH] x86: optionally show last exception from/to register contents

Andi Kleen (on Mon, 13 Aug 2007 15:08:45 +0200) wrote: >On Mon, Aug 13, 2007 at 12:33:05PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > > >> >> if (cpu_has_ds) { >> unsigned int l1; >> --- linux-2.6.23-rc3/arch/i386/kernel/traps.c2007-08-13 >> 08:59:45.0 +0200 >> +++ 2.6.23-rc3-

[patch 2.6.19-rc6] Stop gcc 4.1.0 optimizing wait_hpet_tick away

jmp1d This is not a problem with gcc 3.3.5. Adding barrier() calls to wait_hpet_tick does not help, making the variables volatile does. Signed-off-by: Keith Owens --- arch/i386/kernel/time_hpet.c |2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) Index: linux-2.6/arch/i386/kernel

Re: [patch 2.6.19-rc6] Stop gcc 4.1.0 optimizing wait_hpet_tick away

Nicholas Miell (on Tue, 28 Nov 2006 19:08:25 -0800) wrote: >On Wed, 2006-11-29 at 13:22 +1100, Keith Owens wrote: >> Compiling 2.6.19-rc6 with gcc version 4.1.0 (SUSE Linux), >> wait_hpet_tick is optimized away to a never ending loop and the kernel >> hangs on boot in timer s

Re: [patch 2.6.19-rc6] Stop gcc 4.1.0 optimizing wait_hpet_tick away

David Miller (on Tue, 28 Nov 2006 20:04:53 -0800 (PST)) wrote: >From: Keith Owens >Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 14:56:20 +1100 > >> Secondly, I believe that this is a separate problem from bug 22278. >> hpet_readl() is correctly using volatile internally, but its result is >&g

Re: [patch 2.6.19-rc6] Stop gcc 4.1.0 optimizing wait_hpet_tick away

Andrew Morton (on Thu, 30 Nov 2006 21:05:51 -0800) wrote: >On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 21:14:10 +0100 >Willy Tarreau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Then why not simply check for gcc 4.1.0 in compiler.h and refuse to build >> with 4.1.0 if it's known to produce bad code ? > >Think so. I'll queue this and

Re: [patch 2.6.19-rc6] Stop gcc 4.1.0 optimizing wait_hpet_tick away

Willy Tarreau (on Fri, 1 Dec 2006 06:26:53 +0100) wrote: >On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 04:14:04PM +1100, Keith Owens wrote: >> SuSE's SLES10 ships with gcc 4.1.0. There is nothing to stop a >> distributor from backporting the bug fix from gcc 4.1.1 to 4.1.0, but >> this patch

Re: kdb: add rdmsr and wrmsr commands for i386

|3 -- kdb/modules/kdbm_x86.c| 59 ++ 7 files changed, 85 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff -u linux/arch/i386/kdb/ChangeLog linux/arch/i386/kdb/ChangeLog --- linux/arch/i386/kdb/ChangeLog +++ linux/arch/i386/kdb/ChangeLog @@ -1,3 +1,

Re: kdb: add rdmsr and wrmsr commands for i386

Bernardo Innocenti (on Thu, 17 May 2007 02:36:21 -0400) wrote: >Keith Owens wrote: > >> Before using MSR, you must first check that the cpu supports the >> instruction, rd/wrmsr cause an oops on 486 or earlier. Also using an >> invalid msr number causes an oops, so u

PNPACPI probes serial twice, messes up serial console

Dell SC1425 x86_64 running in i386 mode (the problem also occurs in x86_64 mode). Kernel 2.6.21-rc4, gcc 4.1.0. Config extract at end. Booting with 'console=tty console=ttyS0,9600'. The serial console on ttyS0 (0x3f8, irq 4) is probed twice, once from serial8250_init() and again from serial_pnp

Re: PNPACPI probes serial twice, messes up serial console

Bjorn Helgaas (on Wed, 21 Mar 2007 10:35:38 -0600) wrote: >On Tuesday 20 March 2007 08:32, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >> On Tuesday 20 March 2007 00:46, Keith Owens wrote: >> > Booting with 'console=tty console=ttyS0,9600'. The serial console on >> > ttyS0 (0x3

Re: $CHECK can't be overridden

Dave Jones (on Thu, 22 Mar 2007 01:15:25 -0400) wrote: >make help implies that supplying $CHECK on the command line >should override sparse as the checker used when building with C=1 >Yet, this doesn't seem to be the case. > >This would be useful for cases where for eg, sparse isn't in >the $PATH,

Re: $CHECK can't be overridden

Dave Jones (on Thu, 22 Mar 2007 01:37:14 -0400) wrote: >On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 04:26:39PM +1100, Keith Owens wrote: > > Dave Jones (on Thu, 22 Mar 2007 01:15:25 -0400) wrote: > > >make help implies that supplying $CHECK on the command line > > >should override spar

Re: [PATCH] Use X86_EFLAGS_IF in irqflags.h, lguest.

Rusty Russell (on Thu, 22 Mar 2007 14:52:29 +1100) wrote: >On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 14:24 +1100, Rusty Russell wrote: >> Belay this: there's a X86_EFLAGS_IF in asm/processor.h which we should >> use. Will send patch. > >How's this. There may be other users, but they're not easy to grep for. One les

Re: [PATCH 1/10] safe_apic_wait_icr_idle - i386

Fernando Luis =?ISO-8859-1?Q?V=E1zquez?= Cao (on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 20:13:28 +0900) wrote: >+static __inline__ unsigned long safe_apic_wait_icr_idle(void) >+{ >+ unsigned long send_status; >+ int timeout; >+ >+ timeout = 0; >+ do { >+ udelay(100); >+ sen

<    3   4   5   6   7   8