From: Omar Sandoval <osandov@osandov.com>
To: lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [Btrfs] e5a7b11a5c: shift exponent 32 is too large for 32-bit type 'int'
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 19:35:29 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160715023529.GA19948@vader> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160715015120.GB6978@yexl-desktop>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5388 bytes --]
On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 09:51:20AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>
> FYI, we noticed the following commit:
>
> https://github.com/0day-ci/linux Omar-Sandoval/Btrfs-fix-extent-buffer-bitmap-tests-on-big-endian-systems/20160713-074511
> commit e5a7b11a5caa8d42fe3fb4ff2d75b6811aeb8eb7 ("Btrfs: fix extent buffer bitmap tests on big-endian systems")
>
> in testcase: boot
>
> on test machine: 2 threads qemu-system-x86_64 -enable-kvm -cpu Haswell,+smep,+smap with 1G memory
>
> caused below changes:
>
>
> +------------------------------------------------------------------+----------+------------+
> | | v4.7-rc7 | e5a7b11a5c |
> +------------------------------------------------------------------+----------+------------+
> | boot_successes | 0 | 0 |
> | boot_failures | 80 | 8 |
> | invoked_oom-killer:gfp_mask=0x | 59 | 2 |
> | Mem-Info | 59 | 2 |
> | Kernel_panic-not_syncing:Out_of_memory_and_no_killable_processes | 59 | 2 |
> | backtrace:btrfs_test_extent_io | 35 | 6 |
> | backtrace:init_btrfs_fs | 35 | 6 |
> | backtrace:kernel_init_freeable | 59 | 8 |
> | BUG:kernel_test_oversize | 11 | 4 |
> | backtrace:vfs_write | 24 | 2 |
> | backtrace:SyS_write | 24 | 2 |
> | backtrace:populate_rootfs | 24 | 2 |
> | kernel_BUG_at_mm/filemap.c | 1 | |
> | invalid_opcode:#[##]PREEMPT_SMP | 1 | |
> | RIP:unlock_page | 1 | |
> | Kernel_panic-not_syncing:Fatal_exception | 1 | |
> | backtrace:kswapd | 1 | |
> | BUG:kernel_boot_hang | 9 | |
> | BUG:kernel_torture_test_oversize | 0 | 2 |
> +------------------------------------------------------------------+----------+------------+
>
>
>
> [ 74.703186] UBSAN: Undefined behaviour in fs/btrfs/tests/extent-io-tests.c:367:4
> [ 74.703359] shift exponent 32 is too large for 32-bit type 'int'
> [ 74.703359] CPU: 1 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 4.7.0-rc7-00001-ge5a7b11 #1
> [ 74.703359] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS Debian-1.8.2-1 04/01/2014
> [ 74.703359] 00000000ffffffff 0000000000000097 0000000000000001 0000000000000001
> [ 74.703359] 0000000000000000 0000000000000001 ffff880035143c48 ffffffff82046359
> [ 74.703359] ffffffff813e786b 000000007a4be528 000000007a4be500 0000000000000020
> [ 74.703359] Call Trace:
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff82046359>] dump_stack+0x290/0x3f0
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff813e786b>] ? printk+0x5d/0x65
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff8212cbd9>] ubsan_epilogue+0x12/0x3f
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff8212d61b>] __ubsan_handle_shift_out_of_bounds+0x19c/0x1d1
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff81ca5a42>] ? extent_buffer_bitmap_set+0x508/0x517
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff81e142e6>] __test_eb_bitmaps+0x5f1/0x7a7
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff81e142e6>] ? __test_eb_bitmaps+0x5f1/0x7a7
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff81e16479>] btrfs_test_extent_io+0x281/0x427
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff81d2b075>] ? cleanup_write_cache_enospc+0x88/0x88
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff8606d299>] init_btrfs_fs+0x926/0xd88
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff8606c973>] ? trace_event_define_fields_btrfs_space_reservation+0x32f/0x32f
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff81000884>] do_one_initcall+0x240/0x4ed
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff85fd107c>] kernel_init_freeable+0x3b7/0x628
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff83033b7f>] kernel_init+0x1c/0x49c
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff830600cf>] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x40
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff83033b63>] ? rest_init+0x2aa/0x2aa
> [ 74.703359] ================================================================================
> [ 75.122581] BTRFS: selftest: Extent I/O tests finished
> [ 75.123550] BTRFS: selftest: Running btrfs_get_extent tests
Hm, that doesn't make much sense:
365 for (i = 0; i < len * BITS_PER_BYTE / 32; i++) {
366 x = (0x19660dULL * (u64)x + 0x3c6ef35fULL) & 0xffffffffU;
367 for (j = 0; j < 32; j++) {
368 if (x & (1U << j)) {
369 bitmap_set(bitmap, i * 32 + j, 1);
370 extent_buffer_bitmap_set(eb, 0, i * 32 + j, 1);
371 }
372 }
373 }
How are we shifting by 32? I'll try to reproduce this tomorrow, but I
wonder if it's a compiler/UBSAN bug.
--
Omar
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Omar Sandoval <osandov@osandov.com>
To: kernel test robot <xiaolong.ye@intel.com>
Cc: Omar Sandoval <osandov@fb.com>,
0day robot <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
Anatoly Pugachev <matorola@gmail.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
lkp@01.org
Subject: Re: [lkp] [Btrfs] e5a7b11a5c: shift exponent 32 is too large for 32-bit type 'int'
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 19:35:29 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160715023529.GA19948@vader> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160715015120.GB6978@yexl-desktop>
On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 09:51:20AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>
> FYI, we noticed the following commit:
>
> https://github.com/0day-ci/linux Omar-Sandoval/Btrfs-fix-extent-buffer-bitmap-tests-on-big-endian-systems/20160713-074511
> commit e5a7b11a5caa8d42fe3fb4ff2d75b6811aeb8eb7 ("Btrfs: fix extent buffer bitmap tests on big-endian systems")
>
> in testcase: boot
>
> on test machine: 2 threads qemu-system-x86_64 -enable-kvm -cpu Haswell,+smep,+smap with 1G memory
>
> caused below changes:
>
>
> +------------------------------------------------------------------+----------+------------+
> | | v4.7-rc7 | e5a7b11a5c |
> +------------------------------------------------------------------+----------+------------+
> | boot_successes | 0 | 0 |
> | boot_failures | 80 | 8 |
> | invoked_oom-killer:gfp_mask=0x | 59 | 2 |
> | Mem-Info | 59 | 2 |
> | Kernel_panic-not_syncing:Out_of_memory_and_no_killable_processes | 59 | 2 |
> | backtrace:btrfs_test_extent_io | 35 | 6 |
> | backtrace:init_btrfs_fs | 35 | 6 |
> | backtrace:kernel_init_freeable | 59 | 8 |
> | BUG:kernel_test_oversize | 11 | 4 |
> | backtrace:vfs_write | 24 | 2 |
> | backtrace:SyS_write | 24 | 2 |
> | backtrace:populate_rootfs | 24 | 2 |
> | kernel_BUG_at_mm/filemap.c | 1 | |
> | invalid_opcode:#[##]PREEMPT_SMP | 1 | |
> | RIP:unlock_page | 1 | |
> | Kernel_panic-not_syncing:Fatal_exception | 1 | |
> | backtrace:kswapd | 1 | |
> | BUG:kernel_boot_hang | 9 | |
> | BUG:kernel_torture_test_oversize | 0 | 2 |
> +------------------------------------------------------------------+----------+------------+
>
>
>
> [ 74.703186] UBSAN: Undefined behaviour in fs/btrfs/tests/extent-io-tests.c:367:4
> [ 74.703359] shift exponent 32 is too large for 32-bit type 'int'
> [ 74.703359] CPU: 1 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 4.7.0-rc7-00001-ge5a7b11 #1
> [ 74.703359] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS Debian-1.8.2-1 04/01/2014
> [ 74.703359] 00000000ffffffff 0000000000000097 0000000000000001 0000000000000001
> [ 74.703359] 0000000000000000 0000000000000001 ffff880035143c48 ffffffff82046359
> [ 74.703359] ffffffff813e786b 000000007a4be528 000000007a4be500 0000000000000020
> [ 74.703359] Call Trace:
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff82046359>] dump_stack+0x290/0x3f0
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff813e786b>] ? printk+0x5d/0x65
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff8212cbd9>] ubsan_epilogue+0x12/0x3f
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff8212d61b>] __ubsan_handle_shift_out_of_bounds+0x19c/0x1d1
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff81ca5a42>] ? extent_buffer_bitmap_set+0x508/0x517
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff81e142e6>] __test_eb_bitmaps+0x5f1/0x7a7
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff81e142e6>] ? __test_eb_bitmaps+0x5f1/0x7a7
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff81e16479>] btrfs_test_extent_io+0x281/0x427
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff81d2b075>] ? cleanup_write_cache_enospc+0x88/0x88
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff8606d299>] init_btrfs_fs+0x926/0xd88
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff8606c973>] ? trace_event_define_fields_btrfs_space_reservation+0x32f/0x32f
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff81000884>] do_one_initcall+0x240/0x4ed
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff85fd107c>] kernel_init_freeable+0x3b7/0x628
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff83033b7f>] kernel_init+0x1c/0x49c
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff830600cf>] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x40
> [ 74.703359] [<ffffffff83033b63>] ? rest_init+0x2aa/0x2aa
> [ 74.703359] ================================================================================
> [ 75.122581] BTRFS: selftest: Extent I/O tests finished
> [ 75.123550] BTRFS: selftest: Running btrfs_get_extent tests
Hm, that doesn't make much sense:
365 for (i = 0; i < len * BITS_PER_BYTE / 32; i++) {
366 x = (0x19660dULL * (u64)x + 0x3c6ef35fULL) & 0xffffffffU;
367 for (j = 0; j < 32; j++) {
368 if (x & (1U << j)) {
369 bitmap_set(bitmap, i * 32 + j, 1);
370 extent_buffer_bitmap_set(eb, 0, i * 32 + j, 1);
371 }
372 }
373 }
How are we shifting by 32? I'll try to reproduce this tomorrow, but I
wonder if it's a compiler/UBSAN bug.
--
Omar
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-07-15 2:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-15 1:51 [Btrfs] e5a7b11a5c: shift exponent 32 is too large for 32-bit type 'int' kernel test robot
2016-07-15 1:51 ` [lkp] " kernel test robot
2016-07-15 2:35 ` Omar Sandoval [this message]
2016-07-15 2:35 ` Omar Sandoval
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=20160715023529.GA19948@vader \
--to=osandov@osandov.com \
--cc=lkp@lists.01.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.