New: Infinite loop "b44: eth0: powering down PHY"
Subsystems (2)
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]/
(switched to email. Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not via the bugzilla web interface).
Quoted 22 lines · On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 17:08:27 -0700 (PDT) [email protected] wrote:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10473
Summary: Infinite loop "b44: eth0: powering down PHY" Product: Drivers Version: 2.5 KernelVersion: 2.6.25 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Tree: Mainline Status: NEW Severity: high Priority: P1 Component: Network AssignedTo: [email protected] ReportedBy: [email protected]Latest working kernel version: 2.6.24.4 (from Debian) Earliest failing kernel version: 2.6.25 (vanilla)
Distribution: Debian
Problem Description:
Quoted 8 lines
While booting the new 2.6.25 Kernel, it enters an infinite looping displaying "b44: eth0: powering down PHY".
The system isn't freezed as magick SysRq keys works, but it just stay displaying those messages. I am unable to dump any information using SysRq, however (as the b44(...) messages are too fast).I will attach lspci output and my .config
Apparently a regression.
CCed Gary (the b44 maintainer).
Not sure why I am actually CCed :)
Quoted 35 lines · On Friday 18 April 2008 02:12:15 Andrew Morton wrote:
(switched to email. Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not via the bugzilla web interface).
Quoted 28 lines · On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 17:08:27 -0700 (PDT) [email protected] wrote:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10473
Summary: Infinite loop "b44: eth0: powering down PHY" Product: Drivers Version: 2.5 KernelVersion: 2.6.25 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Tree: Mainline Status: NEW Severity: high Priority: P1 Component: Network AssignedTo: [email protected] ReportedBy: [email protected]Latest working kernel version: 2.6.24.4 (from Debian) Earliest failing kernel version: 2.6.25 (vanilla)
Distribution: Debian
Problem Description:While booting the new 2.6.25 Kernel, it enters an infinite looping displaying "b44: eth0: powering down PHY".
The system isn't freezed as magick SysRq keys works, but it just stay displaying those messages. I am unable to dump any information using SysRq, however (as the b44(...) messages are too fast).
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines
I will attach lspci output and my .config
Apparently a regression.
Can you add a dump_stack() call to the b44_halt() function and post the resulting logs?
Signature · 1 line
Greetings Michael.
Hi!
Quoted 6 lines · Michael Buesch
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 6 lines
While booting the new 2.6.25 Kernel, it enters an infinite looping displaying "b44: eth0: powering down PHY".
The system isn't freezed as magick SysRq keys works, but it just stay displaying those messages. I am unable to dump any information using SysRq, however (as the b44(...) messages are too fast).
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines
I will attach lspci output and my .config
Apparently a regression.
Can you add a
dump_stack()call to theb44_halt()function and post the resulting logs?
What I get is:
Pid: 4, comm: ksoftirqd/0 Tainted: GF 2.6.25-naoliv1 #2 [<f8992420>] [<b0231ffd>] [<b02380b9>] [<b011ed60>] [<b01060f2>] [<b011f059>] [<b011efe1>] [<b01297c8>] [<b0129790>] [<b010473f>]
Something is saying to me that this won't help too much and that probably I need to enable something related with debug (what do I need to enable, please?)
BTW, is it a way to "pause" the messages after dump_stack()?
Thank you!
Best regards,
Nelson
Quoted 14 lines · On Friday 18 April 2008 17:23:06 Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
Hi!
Quoted 11 lines · Michael Buesch
Quoted 10 lines
Quoted 8 lines
While booting the new 2.6.25 Kernel, it enters an infinite looping displaying "b44: eth0: powering down PHY".
The system isn't freezed as magick SysRq keys works, but it just stay displaying those messages. I am unable to dump any information using SysRq, however (as the b44(...) messages are too fast).I will attach lspci output and my .config
Apparently a regression.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 1 line
Can you add a
dump_stack()call to theb44_halt()function and post the resulting logs?What I get is:
Pid: 4, comm: ksoftirqd/0 Tainted: GF 2.6.25-naoliv1 #2 [<
f8992420>] [<b0231ffd>] [<b02380b9>] [<b011ed60>] [<b01060f2>] [<b011f059>] [<b011efe1>] [<b01297c8>] [<b0129790>] [<b010473f>]
Ehm, please enable CONFIG_KALLSYMS.
Quoted 1 line
BTW, is it a way to "pause" the messages after
dump_stack()?
mdelay(1000) will delay one second. But it will kill the system, basically.
Signature · 1 line
Greetings Michael.
Hi!
Quoted 1 line · Michael Buesch
Ehm, please enable
CONFIG_KALLSYMS.
Right. Sorry.
Here it is:
Pid: 4, comm: ksoftirqd/0 Tainted: GF 2.6.25-naoliv #4
[<f899df84>] b44_halt+0x68/0x7f [b44] [<f899f432>] b44_poll+0x36a/0x405 [b44] [<b02393ad>] net_rx_action+0x63/0x131 [<b011ee60>] __do_softirq+0x5a/0xa5 [<b01061e2>] do_softirq+0x52/0x84 [<b011f159>] ksoftirqd+0x78/0x110 [<b011f0e1>] ksoftirqd+0x0/0x110 [<b01298d4>] kthread+0x38/0x60 [<b012989c>] kthread+0x0/0x60 [<b010474b>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x10
Anything else that I can do to help, please?
Thank you!
Best regards,
Nelson
Quoted 1 line · On Friday 18 April 2008 19:12:34 Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
Anything else that I can do to help, please?
Please apply this patch and send me the messages.
drivers/net/b44.c +1 -0
@@ -866,6 +866,7 @@ static int b44_poll(struct napi_struct *if (bp->istat &ISTAT_ERRORS ) {unsigned long flags; +printk (KERN_ERR "b44_poll: istat = 0x%08X\n" , bp->istat);spin_lock_irqsave (&bp->lock, flags);b44_halt (bp);b44_init_rings (bp);
Signature · 1 line
Greetings Michael.
Hi!
Quoted 4 lines · Michael Buesch
Quoted 1 line · On Friday 18 April 2008 19:12:34 Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
Anything else that I can do to help, please?
Please apply this patch and send me the messages.
b44_poll: istat = 0x00000400
b44: eth0: powering down PHY
Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.25-naoliv1 #4
[<f899df84>] b44_halt+0x68/0x7f [b44] [<f88f4440>] b44_poll+0x378/0x415 [b44] [<b010453b>] common_interrupt+0x23/0x28 [<b02393ad>] net_rx_action+0x63/0x131 [<b011ee60>] __do_softirq+0x5a/0xa5 [<b01061e2>] do_softirq+0x52/0x84 [<b013d666>] handle_fasteoi_irq+0x0/0xad [<b011ed3e>] irq_exit+0x35/0x76 [<b01062ad>] do_IRQ+0x99/0xb0 [<b010453b>] common_interrupt+0x23/0x28 [<f886700b>] acpi_idle_enter_bm+0x28c/0x2fd6 [processor] [<b022602b>] cpuidle_idle_call+0x55/0x86 [<b0225fd6>] cpuidle_idle_call+0x0/0x86 [<b01028d3>] cpu_idle+0x8c/0xbc
I have increased the delay now. This is the first message that appears. It seems that after some time it starts to display the other lines from my last email (Pid 4, comm: ksoftirqd/0 ...).
Best regards,
Nelson
Quoted 9 lines · On Friday 18 April 2008 19:43:57 Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
Hi!
Quoted 4 lines · Michael Buesch
Quoted 1 line · On Friday 18 April 2008 19:12:34 Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
Anything else that I can do to help, please?
Please apply this patch and send me the messages.
b44_poll: istat =0x00000400
Hm, a descriptor error. Smells like my DMA fix actually broke this, damit. On which architecture are you running?
Quoted 3 lines
I have increased the delay now. This is the first message that appears. It seems that after some time it starts to display the other lines from my last email (Pid 4, comm: ksoftirqd/0 ...).
I'm always only interested in the first message of one type :)
Signature · 1 line
Greetings Michael.
Quoted 4 lines · Michael Buesch
Quoted 1 line
b44_poll: istat =0x00000400Hm, a descriptor error. Smells like my DMA fix actually broke this, damit. On which architecture are you running?
i386 here.
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 3 lines
I have increased the delay now. This is the first message that appears. It seems that after some time it starts to display the other lines from my last email (Pid 4, comm: ksoftirqd/0 ...).
I'm always only interested in the first message of one type :)
Right :-)
Best regards,
Nelson
Quoted 7 lines · On Friday 18 April 2008 20:09:36 Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
Quoted 4 lines · Michael Buesch
Quoted 1 line
b44_poll: istat =0x00000400Hm, a descriptor error. Smells like my DMA fix actually broke this, damit. On which architecture are you running?
i386 here.
Hm, I tested my patch on i386.
So I'm not sure what's going on, actually. And the patch was pretty trivial and I really can't find a bug in it.
So you say 2.6.24 was still working?
Signature · 1 line
Greetings Michael.
Hi!
Quoted 7 lines · Michael Buesch
Quoted 6 lines · On Friday 18 April 2008 20:09:36 Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
Quoted 4 lines · Michael Buesch
Quoted 1 line
b44_poll: istat =0x00000400Hm, a descriptor error. Smells like my DMA fix actually broke this, damit. On which architecture are you running?
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 1 line
i386 here.
Hm, I tested my patch on i386.
So I'm not sure what's going on, actually. And the patch was pretty trivial and I really can't find a bug in it.
So you say 2.6.24 was still working?
Strange... compiled 2.6.24.4, 2.6.24 and 2.6.23 here and they are all stopping with this:
b44: eth0: Link is up at 100 Mbps, full duplex.
b44: eth0: Flow control is off for TX and off for RX.
And it seems to keep waiting for something. The system isn't freezed (as CTRL+ALT+DEL kills the running processes and correctly reboots the machine).
With Debian's 2.6.24.4 it is working.
With vanilla 2.6.25 and my config it just enters an infinite loop of "b44: eth0: powering down PHY".
Can different GCC versions cause this? Can a bad .config file cause things like that? (I am using this .config for a long time and it has always been working correctly, at least until now)
Thank you!
Best regards,
Nelson
Quoted 20 lines · On Friday 18 April 2008 21:02:37 Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
Hi!
Quoted 7 lines · Michael Buesch
Quoted 6 lines · On Friday 18 April 2008 20:09:36 Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
Quoted 4 lines · Michael Buesch
Quoted 1 line
b44_poll: istat =0x00000400Hm, a descriptor error. Smells like my DMA fix actually broke this, damit. On which architecture are you running?
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 1 line
i386 here.
Hm, I tested my patch on i386.
So I'm not sure what's going on, actually. And the patch was pretty trivial and I really can't find a bug in it.
So you say 2.6.24 was still working?Strange... compiled 2.6.24.4, 2.6.24 and 2.6.23 here and they are all stopping with this:
Quoted 6 lines
b44: eth0: Link is up at 100 Mbps, full duplex.
b44: eth0: Flow control is off for TX and off for RX.And it seems to keep waiting for something. The system isn't freezed (as CTRL+ALT+DEL kills the running processes and correctly reboots the machine).
Well. 2.6.24 didn't have this message. But it could still have the actual bug, of course. So can you try applying my printk patch to a broken 2.6.24 kernel and see whether it triggers the message or not? Under normal circumstances this codepath should never trigger.
Quoted 3 lines
With Debian's 2.6.24.4 it is working.
With vanilla 2.6.25 and my config it just enters an infinite loop of "b44: eth0: powering down PHY".
This message was added in 2.6.25. That doesn't mean the bug was also added in 2.6.25, of course.
Quoted 3 lines
Can different GCC versions cause this? Can a bad .config file cause things like that? (I am using this .config for a long time and it has always been working correctly, at least until now)
Well, possible, although unlikely.
Can you try bisecting the bug? Yeah, I know about the lwn article [1] that says bisecting is baaaaaad (tm), but my opinion is different. :) It's an excellent tool for efficiently finding patches that caused bugs. But take care to really check whether device _works_ or not. Just looking at the actual "powering down PHY" will _not_ be enough, as that was only recently added, as I said.
[1] http://lwn.net/Articles/278137/
Signature · 1 line
Greetings Michael.
Hi!
Quoted 4 lines · Michael Buesch
Well. 2.6.24 didn't have this message. But it could still have the actual bug, of course. So can you try applying my printk patch to a broken 2.6.24 kernel and see whether it triggers the message or not? Under normal circumstances this codepath should never trigger.
No b44_poll message printed when using your patch on 2.6.24, 2.6.23 and 2.6.21.
Quoted 6 lines
Can you try bisecting the bug? Yeah, I know about the lwn article [1] that says bisecting is baaaaaad (tm), but my opinion is different. :) It's an excellent tool for efficiently finding patches that caused bugs. But take care to really check whether device _works_ or not. Just looking at the actual "powering down PHY" will _not_ be enough, as that was only recently added, as I said.
Sure. I will do this when I arrive at home (Can you point me to some URL to read and do the bisections, please?).
What I saw with 2.6.24, 2.6.23 and 2.6.21 is that the interface seems to be up, getting an IP via DHCP (I can ping from another machine), but it stays waiting for something after printing
b44: eth0: Link is up at 100 Mbps, full duplex.
b44: eth0: Flow control is off for TX and off for RX.
Thank you!
Best regards,
Nelson
Hi!
I have tried to do a bisect here (thank you Jike Song for the link). Marked 2.6.20 as good and master as bad. On the first test, I've got this:
(...)
BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual
address 00000000
printing eip:b01b6265
*pde = 00000000
Oops: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP Modules linked in: b44(F) mousedev(F) iwl3945(F) ehci_hcd(F)
mac80211(F) snd_hda_intel(F) thermal(F) i2c_i801(F) ac(F) ssb(F) snd_pcm(F) snd_timer(F) uhci_hcd(F) psmouse(F) evdev(F) battery(F) button(F) processor(F) mii(F) usbcore(F) snd(F) snd_page_alloc(F) sg(F) sr_mod(F) cdrom(F)
CPU: 0 EIP: 0060:[<b01b6265>] Tainted: GF VLI EFLAGS: 00010246 (2.6.23-naoliv1 #1)
EIP is at strlen+0x8/0x11
eax: 00000000 ebx: f7429000 ecx: ffffffff edx: f76b6cb0
esi: 00000000 edi: 00000000 ebp: 00000000 esp: f76b6ca0
ds: 007b es: 007b fs: 00d8 gs: 0033 ss: 0068
Process modprobe (pid: 692, ti=f76b6000 task=f76c6000 task.ti=f76b6000)
Stack: f75a2000 b01b3254 f785f200 b02d3e5b b02cb0da f7856200 b01b324a f7426688
b02cb0da f7856200 f88f61f0 b0310c8c f785f200 f88f8e28 b0207d4e f74266a8
f88f8d9c f7426600 f7426600 00000000 f7453400 b0206d8b f7426688 b02c4e14
Call Trace:
[<b01b3254>] kobject_uevent_env+0x276/0x383
[<b01b324a>] kobject_uevent_env+0x26c/0x383
[<b0207d4e>] bus_add_device+0xad/0xdc
[<b0206d8b>] device_add+0x2a0/0x45e
[<f88f36f1>] ssb_attach_queued_buses+0x1a2/0x297 [ssb]
[<f88f3b2f>] ssb_bus_register+0x120/0x185 [ssb]
[<f88f4ac2>] ssb_pci_get_invariants+0x0/0x281 [ssb]
[<f88f3bf3>] ssb_bus_pcibus_register+0x24/0x47 [ssb]
[<b01bb856>] pci_set_master+0x54/0x58
[<f88f52b1>] ssb_pcihost_probe+0x5e/0x89 [ssb]
[<b01bd0ff>] pci_device_probe+0x36/0x55
[<b020857e>] driver_probe_device+0xc5/0x148
[<b02890a5>] klist_next+0x58/0x6d
[<b02086dc>] __driver_attach+0x49/0x7f
[<b0207ba8>] bus_for_each_dev+0x35/0x57
[<b02083f2>] driver_attach+0x16/0x18
[<b0208693>] __driver_attach+0x0/0x7f
[<b0207e56>] bus_add_driver+0x6d/0x17d
[<b01bd249>] __pci_register_driver+0x55/0x81
[<f881d01f>] b44_init+0x1f/0x48 [b44]
[<b013cdcc>] sys_init_module+0x1545/0x1619
[<b0103e9a>] sysenter_past_esp+0x5f/0x85
=======================
Code: f0 48 5e c3 56 89 d1 89 c6 83 ec 04 31 d2 89 c8 88 c4 ac 38 e075 03 8d 56 ff 84 c0 75 f4 5e 89 d0 5e c3 57 83 c9 ff 89 c7 31 c0 <f2> ae f7 d1 49 5f 89 c8 c3 57 89 c7 89 d0 31 d2 85 c9 74 0c f2
EIP: [<b01b6265>] strlen+0x8/0x11 SS:ESP 0068:f76b6ca0
hub 1-2:1.0: hub_port_status failed (err = -71)
hub 1-2:1.0: hub_port_status failed (err = -71)
hub 1-2:1.0: hub_port_status failed (err = -71)
hub 1-2:1.0: hub_port_status failed (err = -71)
Clocksource tsc unstable (delta = -162081422 ns)
usb 5-2: new high speed USB device using ehci_hcd and address 2 usb 5-2: configuration #1 chosen from 1 choice
hub 5-2:1.0: USB hub found
hub 5-2:1.0: 4 ports detected
sysfs: duplicate filename 'bInterfaceNumber' can not be created
WARNING: at fs/sysfs/dir.c:425 sysfs_add_one() [<b018bebc>] sysfs_add_one+0x54/0xb8 [<b018ba00>] sysfs_add_file+0x42/0x6a [<b018d115>] sysfs_create_group+0x84/0xe7 [<b0206f3f>] device_add+0x454/0x45e [<f88ca72a>] usb_create_sysfs_intf_files+0x24/0x98 [usbcore] [<f88c7295>] usb_set_configuration+0x48f/0x4a9 [usbcore] [<f88cdcdb>] generic_probe+0x50/0x91 [usbcore] [<f88c8784>] usb_probe_device+0x32/0x37 [usbcore] [<b020857e>] driver_probe_device+0xc5/0x148 [<b02890a5>] klist_next+0x58/0x6d [<b0207aa8>] bus_for_each_drv+0x35/0x5c [<b020867f>] device_attach+0x5e/0x72 [<b0208601>] __device_attach+0x0/0x5 [<b0207a24>] bus_attach_device+0x26/0x75 [<b0206d92>] device_add+0x2a7/0x45e [<f88c2c1a>] usb_new_device+0x4d/0x8a [usbcore] [<f88c3746>] hub_thread+0x702/0xa8f [usbcore] [<b012fd84>] autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x33 [<f88c3044>] hub_thread+0x0/0xa8f [usbcore] [<b012fcb7>] kthread+0x38/0x5d [<b012fc7f>] kthread+0x0/0x5d [<b0104abb>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x10 =======================
(...)
This one is probably 2.6.23.
After some time the system continued to boot, but without network interface. So marked it as bad.
The newer bisect failed to compile. Marked it bad. Bisect again, failed, again, failed :-(
My git-bisect log is:
git-bisect start
# good: [62d0cfcb27cf755cebdc93ca95dabc83608007cd] Linux 2.6.20
git-bisect good 62d0cfcb27cf755cebdc93ca95dabc83608007cd
# bad: [3925e6fc1f774048404fdd910b0345b06c699eb4] Merge branch
'for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jmorris/security-testing-2.6
git-bisect bad 3925e6fc1f774048404fdd910b0345b06c699eb4
# bad: [3749c66c67fb5c257771815c186bc32290cacf44] Merge branch
'for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/avi/kvm
git-bisect bad 3749c66c67fb5c257771815c186bc32290cacf44
# bad: [b11115c15351faba978ce1b9e75068e77f6ef48d] serial_core.h:
include <linux/sysrq.h>
git-bisect bad b11115c15351faba978ce1b9e75068e77f6ef48d
# bad: [1936502d00ae6c2aa3931c42f6cf54afaba094f2] [NET_SCHED] qdisc:
avoid transmit softirq on watchdog wakeup
git-bisect bad 1936502d00ae6c2aa3931c42f6cf54afaba094f2
What else can I do, please?
Thank you very much!
Best regards,
Nelson
Quoted 3 lines · On Monday 21 April 2008 20:14:44 Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
This one is probably 2.6.23.
After some time the system continued to boot, but without network interface. So marked it as bad.
That probably was a mistake
Quoted 1 line
What else can I do, please?
You can try latest git. I was told it has a feature to tell bisect "I don't know" instead of "good" or "bad". This can be used if a test kernel doesn't compile, or does fail because of some other bug.
You can also manually bisect the stuff between your known-good version of b44 and the bad one. There were only a couple of patches. You can extract them with git and revert them one by one and see when it does start working again.
I think it was something like 5 patches or so. Nothing too time consuming.
Signature · 1 line
Greetings Michael.
Hi!
Maybe this can help:
Using a new .config, I started to enable/disable options and test. What I found is that if I enable "3G/1G user/kernel split", the kernel works (it boots normally, the network interface works, etc). If I select "3G/1G user/kernel split (for full 1G low memory)" I get the infinite loop of "b44: eth0: powering down PHY".
Working config file (on 2.6.25) is attached.
Diff to the non-working is below:
not_working_config renamed from working_config +4 -4
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ # # Automatically generated make config: don't edit # Linux kernel version: 2.6.25 -# Mon Apr 21 23:28:49 2008 +# Mon Apr 21 23:43:04 2008 # # CONFIG_64BIT is not set CONFIG_X86_32=y
@@ -228,12 +228,12 @@ # CONFIG_NOHIGHMEM is not set CONFIG_HIGHMEM4G=y # CONFIG_HIGHMEM64G is not set -CONFIG_VMSPLIT_3G=y -# CONFIG_VMSPLIT_3G_OPT is not set +# CONFIG_VMSPLIT_3G is not set +CONFIG_VMSPLIT_3G_OPT=y # CONFIG_VMSPLIT_2G is not set # CONFIG_VMSPLIT_2G_OPT is not set # CONFIG_VMSPLIT_1G is not set -CONFIG_PAGE_OFFSET=0xC0000000 +CONFIG_PAGE_OFFSET=0xB0000000 CONFIG_HIGHMEM=y CONFIG_ARCH_FLATMEM_ENABLE=y CONFIG_ARCH_SPARSEMEM_ENABLE=y
Can this be the cause?
Thank you!
Best regards,
Nelson
Quoted 8 lines · On Tuesday 22 April 2008 05:01:54 Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
Hi!
Maybe this can help:
Using a new .config, I started to enable/disable options and test. What I found is that if I enable "3G/1G user/kernel split", the kernel works (it boots normally, the network interface works, etc). If I select "3G/1G user/kernel split (for full 1G low memory)" I get the infinite loop of "b44: eth0: powering down PHY".
Ah, so this bug isn't actually caused by a patch but rather by a different config option.
I think we can't do much about it, currently. The device has strange memory requirements and changing the split does actually break it. This cannot be fixed until andi kleen's mask-allocator is merged. This "bug" has always been there.
Quoted 38 lines
Working config file (on 2.6.25) is attached.
Diff to the non-working is below:not_working_config renamed from working_config +4
-4@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ # # Automatically generated make config: don't edit # Linux kernel version: 2.6.25 -# Mon Apr 21 23:28:49 2008 +# Mon Apr 21 23:43:04 2008 # # CONFIG_64BIT is not set CONFIG_X86_32=y@@ -228,12 +228,12 @@ # CONFIG_NOHIGHMEM is not set CONFIG_HIGHMEM4G=y # CONFIG_HIGHMEM64G is not set -CONFIG_VMSPLIT_3G=y -# CONFIG_VMSPLIT_3G_OPT is not set +# CONFIG_VMSPLIT_3G is not set +CONFIG_VMSPLIT_3G_OPT=y # CONFIG_VMSPLIT_2G is not set # CONFIG_VMSPLIT_2G_OPT is not set # CONFIG_VMSPLIT_1G is not set -CONFIG_PAGE_OFFSET=0xC0000000 +CONFIG_PAGE_OFFSET=0xB0000000 CONFIG_HIGHMEM=y CONFIG_ARCH_FLATMEM_ENABLE=y CONFIG_ARCH_SPARSEMEM_ENABLE=yCan this be the cause?
Thank you!
Best regards,
Nelson
Signature · 1 line
Greetings Michael.