Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 19 Jul 2008 16:20:21 -0700 | From | Greg KH <> | Subject | Re: linux-next: Tree for July 18: warning at kernel/lockdep.c:2068 trace_hardirqs_on_caller |
| |
On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 01:11:36AM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote: > On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 12:58 AM, Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> wrote: > >> firmware_map_add_early() is using bootmem for the allocation. So yes, > >> I guess it should possible to use kobjects here. That said, this code > >> is in fact fairly recent: > >> > >> commit 69ac9cd629ca96e59f34eb4ccd12d00b2c8276a7 > >> Author: Bernhard Walle <bwalle@suse.de> > >> Date: Fri Jun 27 13:12:54 2008 +0200 > >> > >> sysfs: add /sys/firmware/memmap > >> > >> I'll add the Cc. I still have a feeling that the kobject patch should > >> expect to run even when slab is not available. > > > > I never has been expected to do so in the past, so odds are, lots of > > things might break :( > > Yeah. Maybe you should withdraw your ack? :-D > > Signed-off-by: Bernhard Walle <bwalle@suse.de> > Acked-by: Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> > Acked-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> > Cc: kexec@lists.infradead.org > Cc: yhlu.kernel@gmail.com > Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Heh, I didn't realize that this ran so early in the boot process, the code logically looks correct :)
> I'm sorry for having been a bit rash earlier -- it's the combination > of the patches that produce the failure; they both seem okay on their > own. On the other hand, this is what -next is for, isn't it?
Yup.
> Maybe the firmware memmap code can simply run a little later in the > boot sequence?
Possibly. I wonder why this is only a problem on your machine and not on anything that Ingo tested?
thanks,
greg k-h
| |