> On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 11:37:33PM +0530, Kamalesh Babulal wrote:
>> Hi Stephen,
>>
>> When booting the x86_64 boxes with the next-20080409 and 20080410 kernels
>> the kernel bug is hit. The same bug was reported for the April 9 kernel
>> at
http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/4/10/63 (this kernel was compiled with
>> CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR is not set)
>>
>>
>> BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 0000000000000000
>> IP: [<ffffffff802869b1>] kmem_cache_alloc+0x41/0x130
>> PGD 32dc2e067 PUD 32dd6a067 PMD 0
>> Oops: 0000 [1] SMP
>> last sysfs file: /sys/kernel/uevent_seqnum
>> CPU 0
>> Modules linked in: sg
>> Pid: 1, comm: init Not tainted 2.6.25-rc8-next-20080410-autotest #1
>> RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff802869b1>] [<ffffffff802869b1>] kmem_cache_alloc+0x41/0x130
>> RSP: 0000:ffff810bfe4abef8 EFLAGS: 00010046
>> RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff81090e4aa050 RCX: 0000000000405017
>> RDX: 00007ffffb4c05b8 RSI: 00000000000000d0 RDI: 0000000000000000
>> RBP: 0000000000000292 R08: 0000000000586f00 R09: 0000000000586f20
>> R10: 0000000000586f08 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 00000000000000d0
>> R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 0000000000405150 R15: 0000000000000000
>> FS: 000000000058b850(0063) GS:ffffffff8067f000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
>> CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 000000008005003b
>> CR2: 0000000000000000 CR3: 000000090d0e6000 CR4: 00000000000006e0
>> DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
>> DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000ffff0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
>> Process init (pid: 1, threadinfo ffff810bfe4aa000, task ffff81090e4aa050)
>> Stack: 0000000000000000 ffff81090e4aa050 ffff81090e4aa050 0000000000000001
>> 0000000000405110 ffffffff80212f96 0000000000000292 ffff81090e4aa050
>> 00007ffffb4c05a8 ffffffff8020cb79 0000000000000000 ffffffff804da339
>> Call Trace:
>> [<ffffffff80212f96>] init_fpu+0x96/0xf0
>> [<ffffffff8020cb79>] math_state_restore+0x19/0x60
>> [<ffffffff804da339>] error_exit+0x0/0x51
>
> I noticed in another thread, that you are using gcc 4.1.1. I think
> both 4.1.0 and 4.1.1 has some issues with weak symbols. Can you please
> try gcc 4.1.2 and see if that fixes your issue.
>
> When I go back to 4.1.0, I am bitten by smilar oops. But not with 4.1.2.
>
> thanks,
> suresh
