Re: [patch 00/50] 2.6.25.6 -stable review

[Hugh Dickins]

On Fri, 6 Jun 2008, Chris Wright wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 2.6.25.6 release.
> There are 50 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response
> to this one.  If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please
> let us know.  If anyone is a maintainer of the proper subsystem, and
> wants to add a Signed-off-by: line to the patch, please respond with it.

Please add 2.6.26-rc5's 2884f110d5409714f3a04eeb6d2ecd77da66b242
into 2.6.25.6: it's actually not a serious problem, but it does
look as if it's a serious problem, so we should stamp it out.

Thanks,
Hugh

x86: fix bad pmd ffff810000207xxx(9090909090909090)

OGAWA Hirofumi and Fede have reported rare pmd_ERROR messages:
mm/memory.c:127: bad pmd ffff810000207xxx(9090909090909090).

Initialization's cleanup_highmap was leaving alignment filler
behind in the pmd for MODULES_VADDR: when vmalloc's guard page
would occupy a new page table, it's not allocated, and then
module unload's vfree hits the bad 9090 pmd entry left over.

Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins <hugh@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>
---

diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c b/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c
index 32ba13b..998a06e 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c
@@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ void __init cleanup_highmap(void)
 	pmd_t *last_pmd = pmd + PTRS_PER_PMD;
 
 	for (; pmd < last_pmd; pmd++, vaddr += PMD_SIZE) {
-		if (!pmd_present(*pmd))
+		if (pmd_none(*pmd))
 			continue;
 		if (vaddr < (unsigned long) _text || vaddr > end)
 			set_pmd(pmd, __pmd(0));

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/