On Tue, 15 Apr 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote:
quoted text
>
> debug output is:
> 
>   http://redhat.com/~mingo/misc/log-Thu_Apr_10_10_41_16_CEST_2008.bad.rc9
> 
> so it's probably the first few page allocations (setup_cpu_cache()) 
> going wrong already - suggesting a some fundamental borkage in SLAB?

Well, I think it suggests some fundamental borkage in the page allocator.

That first warn-on is from the "alloc_pages_node()" returning NULL at 
bootup. Sure, it could be that the arguments are bogus, but that sounds 
unlikely since none of that is dependent on any kconfig stuff.

The fact that it happens with both SLUB/SLAB makes that even more obvious.

Now, you don't have fault injection on, so it can't be that, and your 
debug entry for *z == NULL didn' trigger in alloc_pages, so it's no that 
one either. 

However, if __alloc_pages() failed, I would have expected to see the 
"memory allocation failed" printk. Why didn't it? Is printk_ratelimit() 
broken at boot (last_msg start out as zero - maybe i should start out as 
a negative number)?

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