On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 08:24:58 -0500
Martin Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's also busted on ia64 in 2.6.11-mm3 if that narrows thing down.
Not necessary, we found the problem and the fix is in Linus's
tree. The clear_page_range() had to be restored to using
pgd_index() looping at the top
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 02:34:42PM -0800, David S. Miller wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 14:06:09 -0800
> "Luck, Tony" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Trying to boot a build of the latest BK on ia64 I see
> > a series of messages like this:
> >
> > mm/memory.c:99: bad pgd e001feba4000.
> >
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 02:34:42PM -0800, David S. Miller wrote:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 14:06:09 -0800
Luck, Tony [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Trying to boot a build of the latest BK on ia64 I see
a series of messages like this:
mm/memory.c:99: bad pgd e001feba4000.
mm/memory.c:99:
On Mon, 2005-03-14 at 15:31 -0800, David S. Miller wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 15:11:42 -0800
> "David S. Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I therefore suspect the pgwalk patches.
>
> I just noticed something else while reviewing this stuff.
> The PTRS_PER_PMD macros aren't used anymore,
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 15:11:42 -0800
"David S. Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I therefore suspect the pgwalk patches.
I just noticed something else while reviewing this stuff.
The PTRS_PER_PMD macros aren't used anymore, so my hacks
to get 32-bit process VM operations optimized on sparc64
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 14:34:42 -0800
"David S. Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 14:06:09 -0800
> "Luck, Tony" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Trying to boot a build of the latest BK on ia64 I see
> > a series of messages like this:
> >
> > mm/memory.c:99: bad pgd
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 14:06:09 -0800
"Luck, Tony" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Trying to boot a build of the latest BK on ia64 I see
> a series of messages like this:
>
> mm/memory.c:99: bad pgd e001feba4000.
> mm/memory.c:99: bad pgd e001febac000.
> mm/memory.c:99: bad pgd
Trying to boot a build of the latest BK on ia64 I see
a series of messages like this:
mm/memory.c:99: bad pgd e001feba4000.
mm/memory.c:99: bad pgd e001febac000.
mm/memory.c:99: bad pgd e001febc0d10.
mm/memory.c:105: bad pmd f000eef3f200.
mm/memory.c:105: bad pmd f000eef3f000e2c3.
Trying to boot a build of the latest BK on ia64 I see
a series of messages like this:
mm/memory.c:99: bad pgd e001feba4000.
mm/memory.c:99: bad pgd e001febac000.
mm/memory.c:99: bad pgd e001febc0d10.
mm/memory.c:105: bad pmd f000eef3f200.
mm/memory.c:105: bad pmd f000eef3f000e2c3.
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 14:06:09 -0800
Luck, Tony [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Trying to boot a build of the latest BK on ia64 I see
a series of messages like this:
mm/memory.c:99: bad pgd e001feba4000.
mm/memory.c:99: bad pgd e001febac000.
mm/memory.c:99: bad pgd e001febc0d10.
Things
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 14:34:42 -0800
David S. Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 14:06:09 -0800
Luck, Tony [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Trying to boot a build of the latest BK on ia64 I see
a series of messages like this:
mm/memory.c:99: bad pgd e001feba4000.
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 15:11:42 -0800
David S. Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I therefore suspect the pgwalk patches.
I just noticed something else while reviewing this stuff.
The PTRS_PER_PMD macros aren't used anymore, so my hacks
to get 32-bit process VM operations optimized on sparc64
aren't
On Mon, 2005-03-14 at 15:31 -0800, David S. Miller wrote:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 15:11:42 -0800
David S. Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I therefore suspect the pgwalk patches.
I just noticed something else while reviewing this stuff.
The PTRS_PER_PMD macros aren't used anymore, so my hacks
13 matches
Mail list logo
