I get a seg fault on both 2.2 and 2.4 kernels by running the following
one-line C program:
int main() { int k = (int *)0x0; }
Debugging the offender,
int main() { int k = (int *)0xc0000000; }
is not very informative: single-stepping over the sole command just
hangs, and you have to press Control-C to interrupt gdb, at which point
you can single-step right into the same problem again.
When the program hangs, 'top' says that the CPU is fully utilized and
the system is spending 80% of its time in the kernel and 20% in the
offending process.
Have you not been able to duplicate it on a 2.4 kernel on x86? If not,
please tell me which 2.4 kernel correctly seg faults.
David Chandler
--_____ David L. Chandler. GrammaTech, Inc. mailto:chandler@grammatech.com http://www.grammatech.com
"Richard B. Johnson" wrote: > > On Thu, 8 Nov 2001, David Chandler wrote: > > > Dick, > > > > You're right that the one-liner below may not necessarily produce a seg > > fault, but shouldn't it terminate normally if it doesn't? After all, > > the program just *reads*. Hanging does not seem to be an option! > > > You may want to see if any deliberate seg-fault actually gets > delivered. Try to read *(0). If that works (seg-faults), then > there may be a problem with some boundary condition on paging. > > I can't duplicate the problem here. You can also try to trace > the code execution to see if it falls into some user-space loop. > > Cheers, > Dick Johnson > > Penguin : Linux version 2.4.1 on an i686 machine (799.53 BogoMips). > > I was going to compile a list of innovations that could be > attributed to Microsoft. Once I realized that Ctrl-Alt-Del > was handled in the BIOS, I found that there aren't any. - 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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 15 2001 - 21:00:20 EST