Re: ATAng still problematic

From: Bruce M Simpson <>
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 01:47:44 +0100
On Sat, Sep 20, 2003 at 02:17:21AM +0200, Marius Strobl wrote:
> > Isn't it still a kernel bug if a user process can trigger a panic?
> Yes, it seems to be a bug in the mlockall(2) implementation. Backing
> it out or hindering cdrecord to use it avoids the panic. I already
> wrote an email to bms_at_ who commited the mlockall(2) and munlockall(2)
> support regarding this issue.

I don't think that's been conclusively established yet, so statements
of the form above are a bit unhelpful.

The problem may well lie elsewhere in the system, as a parameter in
vm_map_copy_entry() is being unexpectedly set to NULL in the backtrace
which you provided me with.

If more people can exercise the same codepath as you appear to be
exercising with different configurations, then I will have more to go on.

Received on Fri Sep 19 2003 - 15:47:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:23 UTC