On 4/9/18 3:26 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 4/9/18 1:32 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 4/9/18 12:38 PM, Mike Snitzer wrote: >>> On Mon, Apr 09 2018 at 11:51am -0400, >>> Mike Snitzer wrote: >>> >>>> On Sun, Apr 08 2018 at 12:00am -0400, >>>> Ming Lei wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> The following kernel oops(divide error) is triggered when running >>>>> xfstest(generic/347) on ext4. >>>>> >>>>> [ 442.632954] run fstests generic/347 at 2018-04-07 18:06:44 >>>>> [ 443.839480] divide error: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP PTI >>>>> [ 443.840201] Dumping ftrace buffer: >>>>> [ 443.840692] (ftrace buffer empty) >>> ... >>>>> [ 443.845756] CPU: 1 PID: 29607 Comm: dmsetup Not tainted 4.16.0_f605ba97fb80_master+ #1 >>>>> [ 443.846968] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.10.2-2.fc27 04/01/2014 >>>>> [ 443.848147] RIP: 0010:pool_io_hints+0x77/0x153 [dm_thin_pool] >>> >>> ... >>> >>>> I was able to reproduce (in my case RIP was pool_io_hints+0x45) >>>> >>>> Which on my kernel, is: >>>> >>>> crash> dis -l pool_io_hints+0x45 >>>> /root/snitm/git/linux/drivers/md/dm-thin.c: 2748 >>>> 0xffffffffc0765165 : div %rdi >>>> >>>> Which is drivers/md/dm-thin.c:is_factor()'s return >>>> !sector_div(block_size, n); >>>> >>>> SO looking at pool_io_hints() it would seem limits->max_sectors is 0 for >>>> this xfstests device... why would that be!? >>>> >>>> Clearly pool_io_hints() could stand to be more defensive with a >>>> !limits->max_sectors negative check but is it ever really valid for >>>> max_sectors to be 0? >>>> >>>> Pretty sure the ultimate bug is outside DM (but not seeing an obvious >>>> place where block core would set max_sectors to 0, all blk-settings.c >>>> uses min_not_zero(), etc). >>> >>> I successfully ran this test against the linux-dm.git >>> "for-4.17/dm-changes" tag that Linus merged after the block changes: >>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/device-mapper/linux-dm.git tags/for-4.17/dm-changes >>> >>> # ./check tests/generic/347 >>> FSTYP -- ext4 >>> PLATFORM -- Linux/x86_64 thegoat 4.16.0-rc5.snitm >>> MKFS_OPTIONS -- /dev/mapper/test-xfstests_scratch >>> MOUNT_OPTIONS -- -o acl,user_xattr /dev/mapper/test-xfstests_scratch /scratch >>> >>> generic/347 65s >>> Ran: generic/347 >>> Passed all 1 tests >>> >>> SO this would seem to implicate some regression in the 4.17 block layer >>> changes. >> >> No immediate ideas come to mind, we didn't have a lot of changes and I >> don't see anything that looks problematic. Maybe you can try and >> bisect it and see what you come up with? > > I ran it, problematic commit is: > > commit 3c8ba0d61d04ced9f8d9ff93977995a9e4e96e91 > Author: Kees Cook > Date: Fri Mar 30 18:52:36 2018 -0700 > > kernel.h: Retain constant expression output for max()/min() > The fun continues. Thinking I'd try a userspace repro and thinking it would be difficult to reproduce, try the attached min.c that just copies all the bits from include/linux/kernel.h axboe@x1:~ $ gcc -Wall -O2 -o min min.c axboe@x1:~ $ ./min 128 256 min_not_zero(128, 256) = 0 -- Jens Axboe