Mailing List archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[linux-dvb] Re: OOPS with budget card + cam (in dvb_ca_en50221_io_write)



On Thursday 11 Nov 2004 22:25, Carlo E. Prelz wrote:
> I started this thread a couple of months ago. Here is some quoted text
> from the past mails to help you remember what this is about.
>
>  Subject: Re: [linux-dvb] Re: OOPS with budget card + cam (in
> dvb_ca_en50221_io_write) Date: Thu, Sep 16, 2004 at 08:06:34AM +0200
>
> Quoting Carlo E. Prelz (fluido@fluido.as):
> >  Subject: Re: [linux-dvb] Re: OOPS with budget card + cam (in
> > dvb_ca_en50221_io_write) Date: mer, set 15, 2004 at 11:39:46 +0100
> >
> > Quoting Andrew de Quincey (adq_dvb@lidskialf.net):
> > > Hi, this is coming from the middle of the msleep() call in
> > > dvb_ca_en50221_io_write() - nothing to do with me (heheheh! :)
> >
> > Lucky man...!
> >
> > > You're using kernel 2.6.8.1. I had to downgrade to 2.6.7 because of
> > > massive problems with that kernel (specifically NFS, but this looks
> > > like the same kind of error). Do you have the preemptible kernel stuff
> > > turned on? That was what caused it for me.
> > >
> > > I upgraded to 2.6.9-rc2 last night - it seems fine so far.
> >
> > Thanks very much for this. Yes, CONFIG_PREEMPT was on. Now switching
> > to 2.6.9-rc2.
>
> During these two months, I spent extended periods abroad, and could
> not give too much attention to that system. The current situation is
> as follows:
>
> * downgraded to 2.6.7 because the parallel port support on 2.6.9-rc2
> was broken for my parport.
>
> * CONFIG_PREEMPT *disabled*
>
> * dvb-kernel cvs from 5 September
>
> The very irregular oops goes on hitting the system. Here is what
> happened this morning:
>
> --8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<--
>
> Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address
> 00000010 printing eip:
> e1a0f46c
> *pde = 00000000
> Oops: 0000 [#3]
> Modules linked in: stv0299 budget_ci budget_core dvb_core saa7146
> ttpci_eeprom b44 8139too CPU:    0
> EIP:    0060:[<e1a0f46c>]    Not tainted
> EFLAGS: 00010202   (2.6.7)
> EIP is at dvb_ca_en50221_io_write+0xac/0x1e0 [dvb_core]
> eax: 00000000   ebx: 00000000   ecx: 00000000   edx: fffffff2
> esi: 00000000   edi: d8e4c1c4   ebp: 00000003   esp: cd2add44
> ds: 007b   es: 007b   ss: 0068
> Process harvest_periods (pid: 8497, threadinfo=cd2ac000 task=d0bcb210)
> Stack: cd2add5e 41d5e101 00000001 00000005 00000003 00000000 0001fde4
> 00000001 01a00001 c0115101 cc85c7f0 00000003 00000000 00000000 00000001
> c1400ab0 c0114308 c403fde4 00000003 00000082 00000000 c11b5ae0 dffae6e8
> 00000001 Call Trace:
>  [<c0115101>] prepare_to_wait_exclusive+0x11/0x50
>  [<c0114308>] __wake_up_common+0x38/0x60
>  [<c012fa59>] mempool_free+0x39/0x80
>  [<c012fa59>] mempool_free+0x39/0x80
>  [<c012fa59>] mempool_free+0x39/0x80
>  [<c029c297>] freed_request+0xa7/0xb0
>  [<c0114023>] scheduler_tick+0x163/0x3f0
>  [<c011de86>] update_process_times+0x46/0x60
>  [<c011dceb>] update_wall_time+0xb/0x40
>  [<c011e11f>] do_timer+0xdf/0xf0
>  [<c011a4bd>] __do_softirq+0x7d/0x80
>  [<c0105ac5>] do_IRQ+0xc5/0xe0
>  [<c012cf63>] wake_up_page+0x13/0x40
>  [<c012d08f>] unlock_page+0x1f/0x30
>  [<c013a3b1>] do_wp_page+0x1d1/0x230
>  [<c0104068>] common_interrupt+0x18/0x20
>  [<c013aed9>] handle_mm_fault+0x159/0x170
>  [<c03efa72>] schedule+0x272/0x430
>  [<c03effad>] schedule_timeout+0x6d/0xc0
>  [<e1a0f3c0>] dvb_ca_en50221_io_write+0x0/0x1e0 [dvb_core]
>  [<c0147a7c>] vfs_write+0xdc/0x140
>  [<c011e30e>] sys_nanosleep+0xde/0x170
>  [<c0147b92>] sys_write+0x42/0x70
>  [<c0103efb>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb
>
> Code: 8b 53 10 0f b6 c1 c1 e0 06 83 3c 02 02 0f 85 f4 00 00 00 39
>
> --8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<----8<--
>
> Has some change in these two months taken place which could solve the
> above? It is quite complex for me to experiment with this system, so I
> would be sure there are reasons for try more modern code.

Hmm, there was a fix to budget-ci a while back involving spinlocks, but I'm 
not sure if that is the problem here.




Home | Main Index | Thread Index