On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 8:38 AM, Toralf Förster <[email protected]> wrote: > On 06/16/2014 11:35 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> [cc: hpa, x86 list] >> >> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Richard Weinberger <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Am 16.06.2014 22:41, schrieb Toralf Förster: >>>> Well, might be the mail:subject should be adapted, b/c the issue can be >>>> triggered in a 3.13.11 kernel too. >>>> Unfortunately it does not appear within an UML guest, therefore an >>>> automated bisecting isn't possible I fear. >>> >>> You could try KVM. :) >> >> Before you do that, just to clarify: >> >> What bitness is your kernel? That is, are you on 32-bit or 64-bit kernel? >> >> What bitness is your test case? 'file a.out' will say. >> >> What does /proc/cpuinfo say in flags? >> > > tfoerste@n22 ~/tmp $ uname -a > Linux n22 3.15.1 #4 SMP Tue Jun 17 17:22:22 CEST 2014 i686 Intel(R) Core(TM) > i5-2540M CPU @ 2.60GHz GenuineIntel GNU/Linux
So entry_32.S is in play. > flags : ... sep ... And sysenter is in use, barring weird boot-time options. > > >> Can you try the attached patch? It's only compile-tested. >> > applied both on top of 3.14.8 and 3.15.1 - issue solved So I guess I diagnosed it right. Yay for reading ugly code. hpa, should I resend a real emailed patch or is my attached thing ok? Presumably this, or something like it, should cc: stable and go in 3.16, too. --Andy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
