Re: Fw: crash on x86_64 - mm related?
- From: Hugh Dickins <hugh@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 20:31:43 +0000 (GMT)
On Tue, 6 Dec 2005, Ryan Richter wrote:
> Another crash during last night's backup:
>
> Bad page state at free_hot_cold_page (in process 'taper', page ffff810002410cc0)
> flags:0x010000000000000c mapping:ffff81017d5beb70 mapcount:2 count:0
> Bad page state at free_hot_cold_page (in process 'taper', page ffff810002410cc0)
> flags:0x010000000000081c mapping:ffff810064cd6910 mapcount:0 count:0
> Kernel BUG at include/linux/mm.h:341
> Pid: 11402, comm: taper Tainted: G B 2.6.14.3 #1
> RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff802b904d>] <ffffffff802b904d>{sgl_unmap_user_pages+93}
> Kernel BUG at mm/rmap.c:487
> Pid: 11402, comm: taper Tainted: G B 2.6.14.3 #1
> RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff8016f437>] <ffffffff8016f437>{page_remove_rmap+39}
> Bad page state at prep_new_page (in process 'dumper', page ffff810002410cc0)
> flags:0x010000000000001c mapping:0000000000000000 mapcount:-1 count:0
> general protection fault: 0000 [3] SMP
> Pid: 1303, comm: kjournald Tainted: G B 2.6.14.3 #1
> RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff8015fdfa>] <ffffffff8015fdfa>{cache_alloc_refill+330}
> NMI Watchdog detected LOCKUP on CPU 1
> Pid: 918, comm: md0_raid5 Tainted: G B 2.6.14.3 #1
> RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff8038385b>] <ffffffff8038385b>{.text.lock.spinlock+116}
Thanks for the further report. And you had my st.c patch in along
with 2.6.14.3, but it still happened, very much like before (except the
latter errors, general protection fault onwards - but once we get into
using one page for two uses at the same time, anything can go wrong).
I've been staring and thinking, but no inspiration yet.
Hugh
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Fw: crash on x86_64 - mm related?
- From: Ryan Richter
- Re: Fw: crash on x86_64 - mm related?
- From: Ryan Richter
- Re: Fw: crash on x86_64 - mm related?
- References:
- Re: Fw: crash on x86_64 - mm related?
- From: Kai Makisara
- Re: Fw: crash on x86_64 - mm related?
- From: Linus Torvalds
- Re: Fw: crash on x86_64 - mm related?
- From: Ryan Richter
- Re: Fw: crash on x86_64 - mm related?
- From: Hugh Dickins
- Re: Fw: crash on x86_64 - mm related?
- From: Ryan Richter
- Re: Fw: crash on x86_64 - mm related?
- From: Hugh Dickins
- Re: Fw: crash on x86_64 - mm related?
- From: Ryan Richter
- Re: Fw: crash on x86_64 - mm related?
- From: Hugh Dickins
- Re: Fw: crash on x86_64 - mm related?
- From: Ryan Richter
- Re: Fw: crash on x86_64 - mm related?
- Prev by Date: Re: Add tainting for proprietary helper modules.
- Next by Date: Re: Linux in a binary world... a doomsday scenario
- Previous by thread: Re: Fw: crash on x86_64 - mm related?
- Next by thread: Re: Fw: crash on x86_64 - mm related?
- Index(es):