From: Waiman Long <waiman.long@hp.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@ghostprotocols.net>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Aswin Chandramouleeswaran <aswin@hp.com>,
Scott J Norton <scott.norton@hp.com>
Subject: SIGSEGV when using "perf record -g" with 3.13-rc* kernel
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 10:29:13 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52D011C9.7000209@hp.com> (raw)
Peter,
I recently encountered a strange problem using 3.13-rc* kernel that
did not happen in a 3.12 kernel. When I ran the high_systime benchmark
of the AIM7 test suite, I saw the following errors:
Child terminated by signal #11
core dumped
Child terminated by signal #11
Child process called exit(), status = 139
core dumped
Child terminated by signal #11
This only happened when I monitored the running of the benchmark using
"perf record -g". There was no problem if callchain was not enabled.
Adding debug code to the kernel showed the following stack trace:
Call Trace:
<NMI> [<ffffffff815710af>] dump_stack+0x49/0x62
[<ffffffff8104e3bc>] warn_slowpath_common+0x8c/0xc0
[<ffffffff8104e40a>] warn_slowpath_null+0x1a/0x20
[<ffffffff8105f1f1>] force_sig_info+0x131/0x140
[<ffffffff81042a4f>] force_sig_info_fault+0x5f/0x70
[<ffffffff8106d8da>] ? search_exception_tables+0x2a/0x50
[<ffffffff81043b3d>] ? fixup_exception+0x1d/0x70
[<ffffffff81042cc9>] no_context+0x159/0x1f0
[<ffffffff81042e8d>] __bad_area_nosemaphore+0x12d/0x230
[<ffffffff81042e8d>] ? __bad_area_nosemaphore+0x12d/0x230
[<ffffffff81042fa3>] bad_area_nosemaphore+0x13/0x20
[<ffffffff81578fc2>] __do_page_fault+0x362/0x480
[<ffffffff81578fc2>] ? __do_page_fault+0x362/0x480
[<ffffffff815791be>] do_page_fault+0xe/0x10
[<ffffffff81575962>] page_fault+0x22/0x30
[<ffffffff815817e4>] ? bad_to_user+0x5e/0x66b
[<ffffffff81285316>] copy_from_user_nmi+0x76/0x90
[<ffffffff81017a20>] perf_callchain_user+0xd0/0x360
[<ffffffff8111f64f>] perf_callchain+0x1af/0x1f0
[<ffffffff81117693>] perf_prepare_sample+0x2f3/0x3a0
[<ffffffff8111a2af>] __perf_event_overflow+0x10f/0x220
[<ffffffff8111ab14>] perf_event_overflow+0x14/0x20
[<ffffffff8101f69e>] intel_pmu_handle_irq+0x1de/0x3c0
[<ffffffff81008e44>] ? emulate_vsyscall+0x144/0x390
[<ffffffff81576e64>] perf_event_nmi_handler+0x34/0x60
[<ffffffff8157664a>] nmi_handle+0x8a/0x170
[<ffffffff81576848>] default_do_nmi+0x68/0x210
[<ffffffff81576a80>] do_nmi+0x90/0xe0
[<ffffffff81575c67>] end_repeat_nmi+0x1e/0x2e
[<ffffffff81008e44>] ? emulate_vsyscall+0x144/0x390
[<ffffffff81008e44>] ? emulate_vsyscall+0x144/0x390
[<ffffffff81008e44>] ? emulate_vsyscall+0x144/0x390
<<EOE>> [<ffffffff81042f7d>] __bad_area_nosemaphore+0x21d/0x230
[<ffffffff81042fa3>] bad_area_nosemaphore+0x13/0x20
[<ffffffff81578fc2>] __do_page_fault+0x362/0x480
[<ffffffff8113cfbc>] ? vm_mmap_pgoff+0xbc/0xe0
[<ffffffff815791be>] do_page_fault+0xe/0x10
[<ffffffff81575962>] page_fault+0x22/0x30
---[ end trace 037bf09d279751ec ]---
So this is a double page faults. Looking at relevant changes in
3.13 kernel, I spotted the following one patch that modified the
perf_callchain_user() function shown up in the stack trace above:
perf: Fix arch_perf_out_copy_user default
@@ -2041,7 +2041,7 @@ perf_callchain_user(struct perf_callchain_entry
*entry, struct pt_regs *regs)
frame.return_address = 0;
bytes = copy_from_user_nmi(&frame, fp, sizeof(frame));
- if (bytes != sizeof(frame))
+ if (bytes != 0)
break;
if (!valid_user_frame(fp, sizeof(frame)))
I wondered if it was the cause of the SIGSEGV. Please let me know your
thought on that.
-Longman
next reply other threads:[~2014-01-10 15:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-10 15:29 Waiman Long [this message]
2014-01-10 16:58 ` SIGSEGV when using "perf record -g" with 3.13-rc* kernel Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-10 17:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-10 17:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-10 18:54 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-01-10 19:43 ` Waiman Long
2014-01-10 19:56 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-01-10 20:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-10 20:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-10 20:28 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-01-15 15:33 ` Waiman Long
2014-01-16 13:39 ` [tip:perf/core] x86, mm, perf: Allow recursive faults from interrupts tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-17 18:10 ` Waiman Long
2014-01-17 19:17 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-01-17 20:08 ` Waiman Long
2014-01-17 21:07 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-01-10 19:37 ` SIGSEGV when using "perf record -g" with 3.13-rc* kernel Waiman Long
2014-01-10 20:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=52D011C9.7000209@hp.com \
--to=waiman.long@hp.com \
--cc=acme@ghostprotocols.net \
--cc=aswin@hp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=scott.norton@hp.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.