From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: oops in proc_sys_compare
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 05:51:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080815045149.GC28946@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0808141908290.15191@blonde.site>
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 07:31:06PM +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> I got this oops below, after several hours of swap-heavy kernel builds
> in tmpfs, on 2.6.27-rc1-mm1 a couple of weeks ago. Tried to reproduce
> it without success, then got a very similar trace (not saved) from
> 2.6.27-rc3 itself doing the same test yesterday: again oopsing in
> proc_sys_compare on address -16, looks like it's trying for
> PROC_I(dentry->d_inode)->sysctl but d_inode is NULL.
>
> I looked to see what's been going on in fs/proc recently, and your
> [PATCH] sanitize proc_sysctl 9043476f726802f4b00c96d0c4f418dde48d1304
> does sound like it might be implicated. I've only seen this on
> PowerPC G5, similar tests on x86_32 and _64 haven't shown it:
> maybe a memory barrier needed somewhere?
Bloody interesting. We never create negative hashed dentries in there and
AFAICS we should never get d_delete() called on those... Missing barrier
would mean serious trouble in dcache.c and not just for /proc/sys...
Are you sure about oops decoding? At least disassembly of proc_sys_compare()
in the kernel image in question would be nice to see...
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: oops in proc_sys_compare
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 05:51:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080815045149.GC28946@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0808141908290.15191@blonde.site>
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 07:31:06PM +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> I got this oops below, after several hours of swap-heavy kernel builds
> in tmpfs, on 2.6.27-rc1-mm1 a couple of weeks ago. Tried to reproduce
> it without success, then got a very similar trace (not saved) from
> 2.6.27-rc3 itself doing the same test yesterday: again oopsing in
> proc_sys_compare on address -16, looks like it's trying for
> PROC_I(dentry->d_inode)->sysctl but d_inode is NULL.
>
> I looked to see what's been going on in fs/proc recently, and your
> [PATCH] sanitize proc_sysctl 9043476f726802f4b00c96d0c4f418dde48d1304
> does sound like it might be implicated. I've only seen this on
> PowerPC G5, similar tests on x86_32 and _64 haven't shown it:
> maybe a memory barrier needed somewhere?
Bloody interesting. We never create negative hashed dentries in there and
AFAICS we should never get d_delete() called on those... Missing barrier
would mean serious trouble in dcache.c and not just for /proc/sys...
Are you sure about oops decoding? At least disassembly of proc_sys_compare()
in the kernel image in question would be nice to see...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-15 4:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-14 18:31 oops in proc_sys_compare Hugh Dickins
2008-08-14 18:31 ` Hugh Dickins
2008-08-15 4:51 ` Al Viro [this message]
2008-08-15 4:51 ` Al Viro
2008-08-15 6:48 ` Hugh Dickins
2008-08-15 6:48 ` Hugh Dickins
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080815045149.GC28946@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.