Andrew Morton a écrit :
> Andy Whitcroft <apw@shadowen.org> wrote:
>> Yes.  I think I have this one.  It appears that the patch below is the
>>  trigger for all our recent panic woe's.  The last of the testing should
>>  complete in the next few hours and I will be able to confirm that
>>  hypothesis; results so far are all good.
>>
>>  	reduce-size-of-percpudata-and-make-sure-per_cpuobject.patch
> 
> That patch did have some missed conversions, which might well explain the
> crash.
> 
> Thanks for narrowing it down - I'll keep that patch in next -mm (and will
> include the known fixups).  Could you please boot test that?  If we're
> still in trouble, I'll drop it.

The NULL choice was maybe wrong. We might need more than one page to fully 
catch all accesses. Something like 32KB.

In the meantime could you apply this one ?

Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>