On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 23:20 +0100, Gerhard Pircher wrote: > -------- Original-Nachricht -------- > > Datum: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 10:42:32 +0000 > > Von: Mel Gorman > > An: Gerhard Pircher > > CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org > > Betreff: Re: Commit for mm/page_alloc.c breaks boot process on my machine > > > > > > > 2. Any chance of seeing a dmesg log? > > > > > That's a little bit of a problem. The kernel log in memory doesn't > > > > > show any kernel oops, but is also fragmented (small fragments seem > > > > > to have been overwritten with 0x0). > > > > > > > > err, that doesn't sound very healthy. > > > > > > Yeah, I know. But the platform code hasn't changed much when porting it > > > from arch/ppc to arch/powerpc. That's why I'm a little bit lost in this > > > case. :-) > > > > > > > I'm at a bit of a loss to guess what might have changed in powerpc code > > that would explain this. I've added the linuxppc-dev mailing list in > > case they can make a guess. > Yes, I'll try to get some comments on the linuxppc-dev mailing list. > > > I think you are also going to need to start bisecting searching > > specifically for the patch that causes these overwrites. > I think I had a similar problem with kernel v2.6.23, too and therefore > waited for kernel 2.6.24. So the problem may exist since a long time. > > > It's a virtual address so it depends on the value of CONFIG_KERNEL_START > > as to whether this is a user program address or not. > AFAIK start_kernel() is called very early in the boot process, were no > user or kernel thread is active. I also wonder why the kernel crashes when > the mem boot option is used. Let's see what the linuxppc-dev people say. Can you post a fresh bug report? There's lots of details missing from the email you forwarded. cheers -- Michael Ellerman OzLabs, IBM Australia Development Lab wwweb: http://michael.ellerman.id.au phone: +61 2 6212 1183 (tie line 70 21183) We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children. - S.M.A.R.T Person