linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: iptables/vmalloc issues on alchemy

To: Dan Malek <dan@embeddededge.com>
Subject: Re: iptables/vmalloc issues on alchemy
From: Herbert Valerio Riedel <hvr@hvrlab.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 07:06:52 +0200
Cc: Josh Green <jgreen@users.sourceforge.net>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, Pete Popov <ppopov@embeddedalley.com>
In-reply-to: <4bf8c757c3a4d32177ab90b92eace823@embeddededge.com>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <1114505009.11315.37.camel@mini.intra> <1114627785.17008.21.camel@SillyPuddy.localdomain> <4bf8c757c3a4d32177ab90b92eace823@embeddededge.com>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 15:06 -0400, Dan Malek wrote:
> On Apr 27, 2005, at 2:49 PM, Josh Green wrote:
> 
> > ...... I was
> > planning on doing some additional gdb debugging of the failure
> > (especially the initial large MMAP attempt by iptables, which was 1.5GB
> > in my case).
> 
> Oh wait ....  I found a bug a while ago from someone trying to load
> large modules.  There is a problem if the kernel grows to need
> additional PTE tables, the top level pointers don't get propagated
> correctly and subsequent access by a thread that didn't actually
> do the allocation would fail.  I'm looking into this, including your
> past message about 64-bit PTEs.

additional note:

the problem only shows up for me only when enabling
CONFIG_64BIT_PHYS_ADDR, in case someone had problems reproducing the
issue...

regards,
-- 
Herbert Valerio Riedel <hvr@hvrlab.org>


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>