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