Bug 13154

Summary:	Kernel do segmentaion fault !
Product:	[Retired] Red Hat Linux	Reporter:	Ola Lundqvist <ola>
Component:	kernel	Assignee:	Arjan van de Ven <arjanv>
Status:	CLOSED WORKSFORME	QA Contact:
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	6.2	CC:	roel.dekker, trev, yiango
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	i386
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2002-12-15 00:04:16 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Ola Lundqvist 2000-06-28 08:13:20 UTC

I have installed a minimalistic RedHat 6.2 with the new 2.2.16-x version 
of the kernel in the update directory.

Everything works well but the next day (this morning) the computer shows 
nasty messages on my screen.

This is a snippet and what I can see on the screen:

54>] [<c010a598>] [<c010f7c3>] ... lot more and I do not want to type more.
Code: 02 00 00 03 00 00 00 50 6a 05 e8 41 5e 00 00 83 c4 08 f6 43
Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address 83fff7fa
current->tss.cr3 = 03a8c000, %cr3 = 03a8c000
*pde = 00000000
Oops: 0000
CPU:     0
EIP:     0010:[<c017e836>]
EFLAGS:  00010046
eax: 83fff7f6  ebx: 00000000  ecx:  5f790f08  edx:  c019514c
esi: c026b648  edi: 000003e8  ebp:  c0235e80  esp:  c3941e78
ds: 0018  es: 0018  ss: 0018
Process syslogd (pid: 436, process nr:15, stackpage=c3941000)
Stack: c02857e0 ... 00000001 0000000c
Call Trace: [<c019514c>] [<c017fbe0>] [<c017f657>] [<c017f9af>] 
[<c017fa35>] [<c017ce86>] [<c019514c>] ... [<c010a008>]
Code: 8b 58 04 9c 5e fa 8b 03 85 c0 74 13 57 50 8d 42 50 50 68 e0
_

I do not know if this says so much but it seems like a null pointer in the 
kernel triggerd by syslogd. But I do not know...

// Ola

Comment 1 Trond Eivind Glomsrxd 2002-01-18 17:20:56 UTC

Still a problem with the errata kernel? (Changing severity, it's not a security
bug).

Comment 2 Alan Cox 2002-12-15 00:04:16 UTC

No answer so assuming ok