Re: 2.6.23-rc7-mm1 -- powerpc rtas panic

2007-10-07 Thread Nish Aravamudan
On 10/5/07, Linas Vepstas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 05:01:47PM -0700, Nish Aravamudan wrote: > > On 10/2/07, Tony Breeds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 10:30:16AM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > > > > > > I realise it'll make the patch bigger,

Re: 2.6.23-rc7-mm1 -- powerpc rtas panic

2007-10-05 Thread Linas Vepstas
On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 05:01:47PM -0700, Nish Aravamudan wrote: > On 10/2/07, Tony Breeds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 10:30:16AM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > > > > I realise it'll make the patch bigger, but this doesn't seem like a > > > particularly good name for

Re: 2.6.23-rc7-mm1 -- powerpc rtas panic

2007-10-04 Thread Nish Aravamudan
On 10/2/07, Tony Breeds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 10:30:16AM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > > I realise it'll make the patch bigger, but this doesn't seem like a > > particularly good name for the variable anymore. > > Sure, what about? > > Clarify when RTAS logging i

Re: 2.6.23-rc7-mm1 -- powerpc rtas panic

2007-10-03 Thread Linas Vepstas
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 02:09:46PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > Until we initialise what exactly? Until we allocate the error log buffer. The original crash was for a null-pointer deref of the unallocated buffer. I just sent out a patch to fix this; its a bit simpler than the below. In t

Re: 2.6.23-rc7-mm1 -- powerpc rtas panic

2007-10-02 Thread Michael Ellerman
On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 11:19 +1000, Tony Breeds wrote: > On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 10:30:16AM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > > I realise it'll make the patch bigger, but this doesn't seem like a > > particularly good name for the variable anymore. > > Sure, what about? Better .. but .. :D

Re: 2.6.23-rc7-mm1 -- powerpc rtas panic

2007-10-02 Thread Tony Breeds
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 10:30:16AM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > I realise it'll make the patch bigger, but this doesn't seem like a > particularly good name for the variable anymore. Sure, what about? Clarify when RTAS logging is enabled. Signed-off-by: Tony Breeds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ---

Re: 2.6.23-rc7-mm1 -- powerpc rtas panic

2007-10-02 Thread Michael Ellerman
On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 10:26 +1000, Tony Breeds wrote: > On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 06:28:19PM -0500, Linas Vepstas wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 01:35:31PM +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote: > > > Seeing the following from an older power LPAR, pretty sure we had > > > this in the previous -mm also: > >

Re: 2.6.23-rc7-mm1 -- powerpc rtas panic

2007-10-02 Thread Tony Breeds
On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 06:28:19PM -0500, Linas Vepstas wrote: > On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 01:35:31PM +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote: > > Seeing the following from an older power LPAR, pretty sure we had > > this in the previous -mm also: > > I haven't forgetten about this ... and am looking at it now.

Re: 2.6.23-rc7-mm1 -- powerpc rtas panic

2007-10-02 Thread Linas Vepstas
On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 01:35:31PM +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote: > Seeing the following from an older power LPAR, pretty sure we had > this in the previous -mm also: I haven't forgetten about this ... and am looking at it now. Seems that whenever I go to reserve the machine pSeries-102, someone els

2.6.23-rc7-mm1 -- powerpc rtas panic

2007-09-24 Thread Andy Whitcroft
Seeing the following from an older power LPAR, pretty sure we had this in the previous -mm also: Unable to handle kernel paging request for data at address 0x Faulting instruction address: 0xc0047ac8 cpu 0x0: Vector: 300 (Data Access) at [c058f750] pc: c0047ac8: