Re: Kernel BUG at fs/mpage.c:489

2008-02-13 Thread OGAWA Hirofumi
Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:26:27 +0100 Bart Dopheide <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 12:05:45PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: >> :)On Wednesday 13 February 2008 08:50, Alan Cox wrote: >> :)> Almost certainly a hardware fail of some sort.

Re: Kernel BUG at fs/mpage.c:489

2008-02-13 Thread Nick Piggin
On Wednesday 13 February 2008 20:32, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 20:24:03 +1100 Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > BTW is it really true that the buffer can never be locked by > > anything else at this point? > > It has been for the past five or six years. With the page loc

Re: Kernel BUG at fs/mpage.c:489

2008-02-13 Thread Andrew Morton
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 20:24:03 +1100 Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > BTW is it really true that the buffer can never be locked by > anything else at this point? It has been for the past five or six years. With the page locked, nobody else can get at that page. > What about fsync_buffers_

Re: Kernel BUG at fs/mpage.c:489

2008-02-13 Thread Nick Piggin
On Wednesday 13 February 2008 20:01, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:26:27 +0100 Bart Dopheide <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 12:05:45PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: > > :)On Wednesday 13 February 2008 08:50, Alan Cox wrote: > > :)> Almost certainly a hardware fai

Re: Kernel BUG at fs/mpage.c:489

2008-02-13 Thread Andrew Morton
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:26:27 +0100 Bart Dopheide <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 12:05:45PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: > :)On Wednesday 13 February 2008 08:50, Alan Cox wrote: > :)> Almost certainly a hardware fail of some sort. > :) > :)Right, but the kernel shouldn't go bug..

Re: Kernel BUG at fs/mpage.c:489

2008-02-12 Thread Bart Dopheide
On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 12:05:45PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: :)On Wednesday 13 February 2008 08:50, Alan Cox wrote: :)> Almost certainly a hardware fail of some sort. :) :)Right, but the kernel shouldn't go bug... Indeed, that's why I'm reporting. :)I don't have a copy of your exact source code.

Re: Kernel BUG at fs/mpage.c:489

2008-02-12 Thread Nick Piggin
On Wednesday 13 February 2008 08:50, Alan Cox wrote: > > Feb 12 19:55:08 butterfly kernel: hde: dma timeout error: status=0xd0 { > > Busy } Feb 12 19:55:08 butterfly kernel: ide: failed opcode was: unknown > > Your drive stopped responding. > > > Feb 12 19:55:08 butterfly kernel: hde: DMA disabled

Re: Kernel BUG at fs/mpage.c:489

2008-02-12 Thread Alan Cox
> Feb 12 19:55:08 butterfly kernel: hde: dma timeout error: status=0xd0 { Busy } > Feb 12 19:55:08 butterfly kernel: ide: failed opcode was: unknown Your drive stopped responding. > Feb 12 19:55:08 butterfly kernel: hde: DMA disabled > Feb 12 19:55:08 butterfly kernel: PDC202XX: Primary channel r

Kernel BUG at fs/mpage.c:489

2008-02-12 Thread Bart Dopheide
Hello, While copying between two DOS-partitions, my screen went haywire saying I found a kernel bug. Since no hits on google when searching for kernel BUG at fs/mpage.c:489! I decided to let you know. Some notes that might be relevant: * I composed the bios out of the original from my asus