Re: How how latent should non-preemptive scheduling be?

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Sitsofe Wheeler
Date: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 - 9:30 am

Ingo Molnar wrote:

I've been struggling to boot -tip/master - currently it blows up just 
after printing SLUB information saying:

BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 00000004
IP: [<c0120078>] account_system_time+0x48/0x120
*pde = 00000000
Thread overran stack, or stack corrupted
Oops: 0002 [#1] PREEMPT

-- 
Sitsofe | http://sucs.org/~sits/
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: How how latent should non-preemptive scheduling be?, Sitsofe Wheeler, (Fri Sep 19, 4:54 am)
Re: How how latent should non-preemptive scheduling be?, Peter Zijlstra, (Fri Sep 19, 7:20 am)
Re: How how latent should non-preemptive scheduling be?, Steven Rostedt, (Mon Sep 22, 5:07 am)
Re: How how latent should non-preemptive scheduling be?, Sitsofe Wheeler, (Mon Sep 22, 11:33 pm)
Re: How how latent should non-preemptive scheduling be?, Sitsofe Wheeler, (Tue Sep 23, 9:30 am)
Re: How how latent should non-preemptive scheduling be?, Sitsofe Wheeler, (Tue Sep 23, 12:39 pm)
Re: How how latent should non-preemptive scheduling be?, Sitsofe Wheeler, (Tue Sep 23, 3:01 pm)
Re: How how latent should non-preemptive scheduling be?, Sitsofe Wheeler, (Sun Sep 28, 1:56 pm)
Re: How how latent should non-preemptive scheduling be?, Sitsofe Wheeler, (Mon Sep 29, 4:11 pm)
Re: How how latent should non-preemptive scheduling be?, Sitsofe Wheeler, (Tue Sep 30, 6:18 am)