Bug#551804: linux-image-2.6.30-2-686: Booting with PAT enabled crashes kernel in OpenGL apps
- To: Bram Senders <bram@luon.net>, 551804@bugs.debian.org
 
- Subject: Bug#551804: linux-image-2.6.30-2-686: Booting with PAT enabled crashes kernel in OpenGL apps
 
- From: maximilian attems <max@stro.at>
 
- Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 12:48:17 +0100
 
- Message-id: <20100213114817.GH2821@stro.at>
 
- Reply-to: maximilian attems <max@stro.at>, 551804@bugs.debian.org
 
- In-reply-to: <20091021195405.GA3697@braille.luon.net>
 
- References: <20091020195119.9265.39027.reportbug@braille.luon.net> <20091020213004.GG25768@baikonur.stro.at> <20091021195405.GA3697@braille.luon.net>
 
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009, Bram Senders wrote:
> 
> Okay, this problem seems way more involved dan I thought it was...  I
> don't know whether it is related to OpenGL or Java (which Processing,
> the app/framework I am using to test this stuff, is written in), but it
> seems unrelated to enabling PAT or not.  I kept a little log of the
> kernels I tried, with and without PAT, the apps I tried (Processing and
> Armagetronad, the first other OpenGL app I could think of) in that
> session, and the result.  See here:
> 
> 1. 2.6.30, PAT on (tried this a couple of times)
>         Processing:     kernel crash
> 2. 2.6.30, PAT off
>         Processing:     works fine (tried for an hour or so)
> 3. 2.6.31, PAT on
>         Processing:     apps don't run, I get strange Java tracebacks
>                         about "Target VM failed to initialize"
>         Armagetronad:   works fine (tried for five minutes)
> 4. 2.6.30, PAT off
>         Processing:     kernel crash
> 5. 2.6.31, PAT on
>         Processing:     kernel crash
> 6. 2.6.26, no PAT support
>         Armagetronad:   works fine (played whole match)
>         Processing:     works fine (tried for an hour or so)
> 7. 2.6.31, PAT off
>         Processing:     kernel crash
> 8. 2.6.26, no PAT support
>         Processing:     got the following error while running an app:
sorry for the late followup how does latest 2.6.32-8 behave for your
tests?
Reply to: