But if it is a kernel bug, I wouldn't be suprized if the oops was
inaccurate.
On Wed, 30 Jun 1999, Peter Steiner wrote:
>
> Please, could somebody explain this dump?
>
> >Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address 8b0c246e
>
> We are at EIP = c017b651 <inet_sendmsg+1> and the instruction is
> pushl %ebx. How can this push fail at 8b0c246e?
>
> >eax: c017b650 ebx: c3941f08 ecx: 00000000 edx: 0000002a
> >esi: c3941eec edi: c017b650 ebp: c3929d4c esp: c3941e80
> >ds: 0018 es: 0018 ss: 0018
>
> >Stack: c3929d4c c3941eec 0000002a c3941eac c3941f08 c3929d4c 00000040
> EBP ESI EDX EBX EBP
>
> The instruction at <inet_sendmsg+0> would be interesting. It's
> pushl %esi here.
>
> My kernel here:
> <inet_sendmsg>: pushl %esi
> <inet_sendmsg+1>: pushl %ebx
> <inet_sendmsg+2>: movl 0xc(%esp,1),%eax
> <inet_sendmsg+6>: movl 0x18(%eax),%ebx
> <inet_sendmsg+9>: movl 0x10(%esp,1),%esi
> <inet_sendmsg+13>: testb $0x2,0xac(%ebx)
>
> Oops disassembly:
> <inet_sendmsg>: ???
> <inet_sendmsg+1> pushl %ebx
> <inet_sendmsg+2> movl 0xc(%esp,1),%eax
> <inet_sendmsg+6> movl 0x18(%eax),%ebx
> <inet_sendmsg+9> movl 0x10(%esp,1),%esi
> <inet_sendmsg+13> testb $0x2,0xac(%ebx)
>
> It should be push %esi, but if so, where does the EBP on the stack come
> from?
>
> Peter
> --
> _ x ___
> / \_/_\_ /,--' p.steiner@t-online.de (Peter Steiner)
> \/>'~~~~//
> \_____/ signature V0.2 alpha
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/