Re: ATAng still problematic

From: Marius Strobl <>
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 03:14:44 +0200
On Sat, Sep 20, 2003 at 01:47:44AM +0100, Bruce M Simpson wrote:
> 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.

Ok, sorry.

> 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.

It's just certainly not ATAng or ATAPICAM as I get this panic on a
SCSI-only box, too.

> 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 - 16:15:17 UTC

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