From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at ffffffffffffffff
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 17:32:51 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100819173251.88d7c0a9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100819081208.GA5637@swordfish.minsk.epam.com>
On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 11:12:08 +0300
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On (08/18/10 12:06), Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > yet another trace:
> > >
> > > [ 5845.374558] CPU 1 is now offline
> > > [ 5845.376169] INFO: trying to register non-static key.
> > > [ 5845.376251] the code is fine but needs lockdep annotation.
> > > [ 5845.376327] turning off the locking correctness validator.
> > > [ 5845.376405] Pid: 6754, comm: bash Not tainted 2.6.36-rc0-git12-07921-g60bf26a-dirty #122
> > > [ 5845.376521] Call Trace:
> > > [ 5845.376570] [<ffffffff81063e89>] __lock_acquire+0x2d1/0x17fd
> > > [ 5845.376657] [<ffffffff81132b2a>] ? sysfs_deactivate+0x3e/0xec
> > > [ 5845.376747] [<ffffffff81062ddd>] ? mark_held_locks+0x50/0x72
> > > [ 5845.376834] [<ffffffff81065893>] lock_acquire+0x97/0xb6
> > > [ 5845.376917] [<ffffffff8137145b>] ? percpu_counter_hotcpu_callback+0x3e/0x93
> > > [ 5845.377021] [<ffffffff81374321>] ? mutex_lock_nested+0x2f3/0x31b
> > > [ 5845.377113] [<ffffffff81371446>] ? percpu_counter_hotcpu_callback+0x29/0x93
> > > [ 5845.377218] [<ffffffff8137568d>] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x4e/0x60
> > > [ 5845.377312] [<ffffffff8137145b>] ? percpu_counter_hotcpu_callback+0x3e/0x93
> > > [ 5845.377409] [<ffffffff8137145b>] percpu_counter_hotcpu_callback+0x3e/0x93
> > > [ 5845.377475] [<ffffffff81057344>] notifier_call_chain+0x32/0x5e
> > > [ 5845.377529] [<ffffffff8105738f>] __raw_notifier_call_chain+0x9/0xb
> > > [ 5845.377587] [<ffffffff8103c6e3>] __cpu_notify+0x1b/0x2d
> > > [ 5845.377638] [<ffffffff8103c703>] cpu_notify+0xe/0x10
> > > [ 5845.377684] [<ffffffff8103c70e>] cpu_notify_nofail+0x9/0x11
> > > [ 5845.377738] [<ffffffff81362d82>] _cpu_down+0x151/0x206
> > > [ 5845.377786] [<ffffffff81362ea8>] cpu_down+0x28/0x35
> > > [ 5845.377833] [<ffffffff8136430d>] store_online+0x27/0x6e
> > > [ 5845.377884] [<ffffffff812923ab>] sysdev_store+0x1b/0x1d
> > > [ 5845.377933] [<ffffffff811321b2>] sysfs_write_file+0x103/0x13f
> > > [ 5845.377990] [<ffffffff810daf92>] vfs_write+0xb0/0x14f
> > > [ 5845.378038] [<ffffffff810db22e>] sys_write+0x45/0x6c
> > > [ 5845.378088] [<ffffffff81002002>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
> > > [ 5845.378166] BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at ffffffffffffffff
> > > [ 5845.378236] IP: [<ffffffff81371487>] percpu_counter_hotcpu_callback+0x6a/0x93
> >
> > It appears that one of the counters on the global list has been
> > trashed: lockdep doesn't recognise its spinlock and its internal
> > pointers are all-ones.
> >
> > We need to identify that counter and then go take a look at whichever
> > subsystem ownes it.
> >
> > A crude approach is:
> >
> > --- a/lib/percpu_counter.c~a
> > +++ a/lib/percpu_counter.c
> > @@ -69,6 +69,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__percpu_counter_sum);
> > int __percpu_counter_init(struct percpu_counter *fbc, s64 amount,
> > struct lock_class_key *key)
> > {
> > + printk("__percpu_counter_init(%p)\n", fbc);
> > + dump_stack();
> > spin_lock_init(&fbc->lock);
> > lockdep_set_class(&fbc->lock, key);
> > fbc->count = amount;
> > @@ -126,6 +128,7 @@ static int __cpuinit percpu_counter_hotc
> > s32 *pcount;
> > unsigned long flags;
> >
> > + printk("percpu_counter_hotcpu_callback(%p)\n", fbc);
> > spin_lock_irqsave(&fbc->lock, flags);
> > pcount = per_cpu_ptr(fbc->counters, cpu);
> > fbc->count += *pcount;
> > _
> >
> > If you can please apply that patch and then make it crash? We can use
> > the address from the percpu_counter_hotcpu_callback() printk to look up
> > the stack trace from __percpu_counter_init() which will lead us to the
> > code which owns that counter.
> >
>
> Sure, I'll try.
I suspect this was fixed by
commit 602586a83b719df0fbd94196a1359ed35aeb2df3
Author: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
AuthorDate: Tue Aug 17 15:23:56 2010 -0700
Commit: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
CommitDate: Tue Aug 17 18:33:11 2010 -0700
shmem: put_super must percpu_counter_destroy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-08-20 0:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-08-13 13:49 BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at ffffffffffffffff Sergey Senozhatsky
2010-08-18 19:06 ` Andrew Morton
2010-08-19 8:12 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2010-08-20 0:32 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2010-08-20 7:10 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
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=20100819173251.88d7c0a9.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com \
/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.