Hi,
On Tue, 18 Mar 2025 23:53:34 +0530
Naveen Kumar P wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am currently debugging an issue on an x86 machine running the latest
> Linux kernel, involving a PCIe device whose memory is mapped via BAR0.
> I am encountering unexpected behavior when reading its PCI
> configuration
Hi Chris,
Thanks for the fix, few comments below.
On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 12:54:26PM +, Chris Bainbridge wrote:
> Fix an oops in ttm_bo_delayed_delete which results from dererencing a
> dangling pointer:
>
> Oops: general protection fault, probably for non-canonical address
> 0x6b6b6b6b6b6b
On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 03:06:52PM +0100, Christian König wrote:
> Am 19.03.25 um 14:04 schrieb Danilo Krummrich:
>
> >> Signed-off-by: Chris Bainbridge
> >> Co-Developed-by: Christian König
> > Then also Christian's SoB is required.
>
> I only pointed out which two lines in nouveau need to mov
Am 19.03.25 um 14:04 schrieb Danilo Krummrich:
> Hi Chris,
>
> Thanks for the fix, few comments below.
>
> On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 12:54:26PM +, Chris Bainbridge wrote:
>> Fix an oops in ttm_bo_delayed_delete which results from dererencing a
>> dangling pointer:
>>
>> Oops: general protection f
On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 03:32:14PM +0100, Simona Vetter wrote:
> So I think you can still achieve that building on top of revocable and a
> few more abstractions that are internally unsafe. Or are you thinking of
> different runtime checks?
I'm thinking on the access side of the revocable you don
