On 09/17/2013 03:29 PM, Fengguang Wu wrote: > Hi Vlastimil, > >> >> Also, some of the failures during bisect were not due to this bug, but a >> WARNING for >> list_add corruption which hopefully is not related to munlock. While it is >> probably a far stretch, >> some kind of memory corruption could also lead to the erroneous behavior of >> the munlock code. >> >> Can you therefore please retest with the bisected patch reverted (patch >> below) to see if the other >> WARNING still occurs and can be dealt with separately, so there are not >> potentially two bugs to >> be chased at the same time? > > Yes there seems to be one more bug, the attached dmesg is for the > kernel with your patch reverted. I'm trying to bisect the other bug > now.
Thanks. Meanwhile I was able to reproduce the bug in my patch in a VM with x86_32 without PAE. As it turns out, pmd_addr_end() on such configuration without pmd really does not bound the address to page table boundary, but is a no-op. Working on a fix. Vlastimil > Thanks, > Fengguang > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
