Satyam Sharma wrote:
> Hi Gabriel,
>
> On 7/16/07, Gabriel C <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>> ( http://194.231.229.228/Oops.txt )
>>
>
>
>> I cannot reproduce this on plain 2.6.22 so I've started to bisect the
>> problem.
>>
>
> Could you reproduce this oops at will at the "bad" points? [ Note that
> git-bisect isn't quite applicable to bugs that are not 100% reproducible.
> The ones that passed as "good" may have passed only because the
> bug didn't get triggered on that particular test. Also, a perfectly good
> commit could get unnecessarily marked "bad" because the bug
> happened to get triggered for it ... so it's not quite trust-worthy for
> your case. ]
>
Yes all marked 'bad' ponts have the Oops , at least here.
>
>> Here the bisect result:
>>
>> 3007e997de91ec59af39a3f9c91595b31ae6e08b is first bad commit
>> commit 3007e997de91ec59af39a3f9c91595b31ae6e08b
>> Author: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
>> Date: Thu Jun 14 04:27:23 2007 +0900
>>
>> sysfs: use sysfs_mutex to protect the sysfs_dirent tree
>>
>> As kobj sysfs dentries and inodes are gonna be made reclaimable,
>> i_mutex can't be used to protect sysfs_dirent tree. Use sysfs_mutex
>> globally instead. As the whole tree is protected with sysfs_mutex,
>> there is no reason to keep sysfs_rename_sem. Drop it.
>>
>> While at it, add docbook comments to functions which require
>> sysfs_mutex locking.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
>> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
>>
>> :040000 040000 9deba7887752bc343cc4f5dea2dac70e895ea8b6
>> 75340b6e18c1ada500bb1a2b99ee88fd93ebae8c M fs
>>
>
> Hmm, I don't see why this one could introduce an oops in SLUB,
> but it's doing some locking-related stuff, and if it didn't get it right,
> the resulting races /could/ lead to some oops. But ... a recently
> posted patch (http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/7/16/204) from Akinobu
> Mita does point to an oops that was introduced by commit
> 0c096b507f15397da890051ee73de4266d3941fb that belongs to the
> same patchset -- kmem_cache_free(NULL) is illegal and so will oops.
> A curious coincidence is that you do see sysfs_new_dirent() in the
> stack trace there, but the oops there is in kmem_cache_free(), not
> kmem_cache_zalloc() as your dmesg output indicated.
>
> Try that patch anyway, but I don't think that'll solve your problem --
> if it was, you would've been seeing "unable to handle kernel NULL
> pointer dereference" but what you've been posting is "unable to
> handle kernel paging request at virtual address <non_null_ptr>" ...
>
I will try this patch and look whatever it helps.
> Gaah.
>
> And the worst thing about it all is that we're not able to trigger the
> oops with debugging options -- that backtrace is horrible, so I'd
> suggest CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER, at the very least. And also
> perhaps DEBUG_INFO while we're at it -- that'll make later
> analysis easier, if nothing else.
>
I will enable DEBUG option and reproduce in a bit.
> [ BTW I couldn't even get my compiler to generate the same
> "Code:" as we saw in your dmesg (I suspect all the oopsen
> have occurred with DEBUG=n, yes?) so my earlier analysis
> that suspected SLUB's page->lockless_freelist in slab_alloc()
> as the source of that invalid kernel address was actually
> based on some human-work rather than simple tools doing
> their thing. Gaah, again! ]
>
My original report ( also first Oops posted here ) was with DEBUG_KERNEL=y
but as I said I will reproduce in a bit with all the DEBUG options you
suggested.
Shall I enable DEBUG_PAGEALLOC too ?
> I'm thoroughly mystified ... Christoph? Tejun? Someone?
>
> Satyam
>
>
Gabriel
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
