Re: 2.6.17-rc1 did break XFS

[Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>]

On Thu, 13 Apr 2006, Keith Owens wrote:

> Nathan Scott (on Thu, 13 Apr 2006 15:35:33 +1000) wrote:
> >On Thu, Apr 13, 2006 at 07:21:45AM +0200, Herbert Poetzl wrote:
> >> [   39.585041] BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address 7856c380
> >> [   39.586688]  printing eip:
> >> [   39.587040] 78129430
> >> [   39.587354] *pde = 005bf027
> >> [   39.587709] *pte = 0056c000
> >> [   39.588201] Oops: 0000 [#1]
> >> [   39.588536] SMP DEBUG_PAGEALLOC
> >> [   39.589057] Modules linked in:
> >> [   39.589639] CPU:    0
> >> [   39.589670] EIP:    0060:[<78129430>]    Not tainted VLI
> >> [   39.589710] EFLAGS: 00000206   (2.6.17-rc1 #1) 
> >> [   39.591291] EIP is at notifier_chain_register+0x20/0x50
> >> [   39.591890] eax: 7856c378   ebx: 878db3f8   ecx: 00000000   edx: 784bf9bc
> >> [   39.592601] esi: 878db3f8   edi: 878e7c00   ebp: 878db800   esp: 878cad5c
> >> [   39.593399] ds: 007b   es: 007b   ss: 0068
> >> [   39.593896] Process mount (pid: 50, threadinfo=878ca000 task=87f7e570)
> >> [   39.594530] Stack: <0>784bf9a0 781295f4 784bf9bc 878db3f8 878db000 878db000 78136997 784bf9a0 
> >> [   39.595839]        878db3f8 782d43e6 878db3f8 00000404 878db000 87d1e6a0 878e7c00 782d1813 
> >> [   39.597002]        878db000 00000001 782e5eaf 00000424 00000001 878e7c00 87d1e6a0 782f2150 
> >> [   39.598164] Call Trace:
> >> [   39.598592]  <781295f4> blocking_notifier_chain_register+0x54/0x90   <78136997> register_cpu_notifier+0x17/0x20
> >> [   39.600024]  <782d43e6> xfs_icsb_init_counters+0x46/0xb0   <782d1813> xfs_mount_init+0x23/0x160
> >> [   39.601199]  <782e5eaf> kmem_zalloc+0x1f/0x50   <782f2150> bhv_insert_all_vfsops+0x10/0x50
> >> [   39.602315]  <782f1835> xfs_fs_fill_super+0x35/0x1f0   <78313607> snprintf+0x27/0x30
> >> [   39.603437]  <781a2134> disk_name+0x64/0xc0   <78168fbf> sb_set_blocksize+0x1f/0x50
> >> [   39.604524]  <78168909> get_sb_bdev+0x109/0x160   <781445ef> __alloc_pages+0x5f/0x370
> >> [   39.605612]  <782f1a20> xfs_fs_get_sb+0x30/0x40   <782f1800> xfs_fs_fill_super+0x0/0x1f0
> >> [   39.606698]  <78168bb0> do_kern_mount+0xa0/0x160   <78181467> do_new_mount+0x77/0xc0
> >> [   39.607764]  <78181b2f> do_mount+0x1bf/0x220   <783f4178> iret_exc+0x3d4/0x6ab
> >> [   39.608790]  <78181913> copy_mount_options+0x63/0xc0   <783f398f> lock_kernel+0x2f/0x50
> >> [   39.609867]  <78181f2f> sys_mount+0x9f/0xe0   <78102b27> syscall_call+0x7/0xb
> >> [   39.610923] Code: 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 53 8b 54 24 08 8b 5c 24 0c 8b 02 85 c0 74 31 8b 4b 08 8d b4 26 00 00 00 00 8d bc 27 00 00 00 00 <3b> 48 08 7f 1b 8d 50 04 8b 40 04 85 c0 75 f1 31 c0 eb 0d 90 90 
> 
> Ignoring the leading NOPs, that decodes to
> 
>    0:   53                      push   %ebx
>    1:   8b 54 24 08             mov    0x8(%esp,1),%edx
>    5:   8b 5c 24 0c             mov    0xc(%esp,1),%ebx
>    9:   8b 02                   mov    (%edx),%eax
>    b:   85 c0                   test   %eax,%eax
>    d:   74 31                   je     0x40
>    f:   8b 4b 08                mov    0x8(%ebx),%ecx
>   12:   8d b4 26 00 00 00 00    lea    0x0(%esi,1),%esi
>   19:   8d bc 27 00 00 00 00    lea    0x0(%edi,1),%edi
>   20:   3b 48 08                cmp    0x8(%eax),%ecx		<==== oops
>   23:   7f 1b                   jg     0x40
>   25:   8d 50 04                lea    0x4(%eax),%edx
>   28:   8b 40 04                mov    0x4(%eax),%eax
>   2b:   85 c0                   test   %eax,%eax
>   2d:   75 f1                   jne    0x20
>   2f:   31 c0                   xor    %eax,%eax
>   31:   eb 0d                   jmp    0x40
> 
> static int notifier_chain_register(struct notifier_block **nl,
>                 struct notifier_block *n)
> {
>         while ((*nl) != NULL) {
>                 if (n->priority > (*nl)->priority)		<=== oops
>                         break;
>                 nl = &((*nl)->next);
>         }
>         n->next = *nl;
>         rcu_assign_pointer(*nl, n);
>         return 0;
> }
> 
> notifier_chain_register() is running the existing chain to find the
> place where XFS needs to be inserted, and the existing chain is
> corrupt.  Probably not an XFS problem.

I agree.  It looks like some module registered a cpu notifier and then
forgot to unregister the notifier block when it was unloaded.

If you add some stack-dump debugging to register_cpu_notifier() and 
unregister_cpu_notifier() it ought to be pretty easy to identify the 
guilty party.

Alan Stern

-
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/