From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754852Ab0JTSdi (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Oct 2010 14:33:38 -0400 Received: from c-67-162-90-113.hsd1.in.comcast.net ([67.162.90.113]:34008 "HELO kosh.dhis.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1753249Ab0JTSdh (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Oct 2010 14:33:37 -0400 Message-ID: <20101020183336.1714.qmail@kosh.dhis.org> From: pacman@kosh.dhis.org Subject: Re: PROBLEM: memory corrupting bug, bisected to 6dda9d55 To: benh@kernel.crashing.org (Benjamin Herrenschmidt) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 13:33:36 -0500 (GMT+5) Cc: segher@kernel.crashing.org (Segher Boessenkool), linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <1287570736.2198.19.camel@pasglop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Benjamin Herrenschmidt writes: > > On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 22:23 -0500, pacman@kosh.dhis.org wrote: > > The diff fragment above applied inside prom_close_stdin, but there are > > some > > prom_printf calls after prom_close_stdin. Calling prom_printf after > > closing > > stdout sounds like it could be bad. If I moved it down below all the > > prom_printf's, it would be after the "quiesce" call. Would that be > > acceptable > > (or even interesting as an experiment)? Does a close need a quiesce > > after it? > > Just try :-) "quiesce" is something that afaik only apple ever > implemented anyways. It uses hooks inside their OF to shut down all > drivers that do bus master (among other HW sanitization tasks). I booted a version with a prom_close_stdout after the last prom_debug. It didn't have any effect. That 1000Hz clock was still ticking. -- Alan Curry