On Fri, 14 Nov 1997, Simon's Mailing List Account wrote:
> Just got an oops in 2.1.63+f00f patch. this was when i killed
> xquake using the window manager. (accidentally started it on a 16-bit
> display)
>
> ksymoops says:
> >>EIP: c012c362 <dput+da/ec>
>
> Code: c012c362 <dput+da/ec>
> Code: c012c362 <dput+da/ec> c7 05 00 00 00 movl $0x0,0x0
> Code: c012c367 <dput+df/ec> 00 00 00 00 00
> Code: c012c372 <dput+ea/ec> 83 c4 10 addl $0x10,%esp
> Code: c012c375 <d_invalidate+1/2c> 5b popl %ebx
> Code: c012c376 <d_invalidate+2/2c> 5e popl %esi
> Code: c012c377 <d_invalidate+3/2c> c3 ret
> Code: c012c378 <d_invalidate+4/2c> 89 f6 movl %esi,%esi
> Code: c012c37a <d_invalidate+6/2c> 53 pushl %ebx
> Code: c012c37b <d_invalidate+7/2c> 8b 00 movl (%eax),%eax
> Code: c012c383 <d_invalidate+f/2c> 90 nop
> Code: c012c384 <d_invalidate+10/2c> 90 nop
> Code: c012c385 <d_invalidate+11/2c> 90 nop
>
> and the original oops was
> Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 00000000
> current->tss.cr3 = 00101000, %cr3 = 00101000
> *pde = 00000000
> Oops: 0002
> CPU: 0
> EIP: 0010:[<c012c362>]
> EFLAGS: 00010282
> eax: 00000022 ebx: c0c28160 ecx: c020248c edx: c68fe000
> esi: ffffffff edi: 00000000 ebp: c0c28160 esp: c269ff44
> ds: 0018 es: 0018 ss: 0018
> Process xquake.real (pid: 6566, process nr: 104, stackpage=c269f000)
> Stack: c01e0950 ffffffff c0003be0 c08d3240 c1a3f480 c077fb70 c0120525 c0c28160
> 00000000 c1a3f480 00000000 00000001 c012057f c1a3f480 00000003 00000007
> c28516a0 c0113dbc c1a3f480 0000000d c269e000 c269ffc4 ffffffff c0109360
> Call Trace: [<c01e0950>] [<c0120525>] [<c012057f>] [<c0113dbc>] [<c0109360>] [<c0109491>]
> Code: c7 05 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 83 c4 10 5b 5e c3 89 f6 53 8b
>
> P54C/133 (with f00f bug), 112MB RAM, kernel compiled with gcc 2.7.2.1
>
> Simon Karpen slk@shodor.org
> Sysadmin, Shodor Education Foundation
>
> "On two occasions I have been asked [by members of Parliament!], `Pray,
> Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right
> answers come out?' I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of
> confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question."
> -- Charles Babbage
>
>