From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?UTF-8?Q?Martin=2D=C3=89ric_Racine?= Subject: Re: [Bug #13941] x86 Geode issue Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 00:12:17 +0300 Message-ID: <11fae7c70908161412v61fd233au5166e18f4c4d0931@mail.gmail.com> References: <200908131654.45227.rjw@sisk.pl> <11fae7c70908130800q7b4a5293t5c373613d736d74@mail.gmail.com> <200908132034.34951.rjw@sisk.pl> <11fae7c70908161217p33830075p783880315a31b2e5@mail.gmail.com> <20090816205706.GB3463@elte.hu> Reply-To: q-funk-X3B1VOXEql0@public.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:reply-to:received :in-reply-to:references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=d7iPnOBDsOmnr+Y4KgQ5Wakn6xA7exXQl/w4LfONRwY=; b=JHvFq4ZCl4O09lsHf27WsaiP/K3LIiJ2Uja34eQ9ONSTjVqibNTOd2XXPLhjSJAb+N b/ne5Lw7JT7GZ++6i5FNEn5InOvs+6s8IdXPStKRXGVg/YbsJIVVJpR7oXCBhg7wE406 gqaY3C+UIXeSYRiBea5nZyHamCaZDIw1SLXRQ= In-Reply-To: <20090816205706.GB3463-X9Un+BFzKDI@public.gmane.org> Sender: kernel-testers-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" To: Ingo Molnar Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Alexander Viro , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Kernel Testers List 2009/8/16 Ingo Molnar : > > * Martin-=C3=89ric Racine wrote: > >> On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 9:34 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrot= e: >> > On Thursday 13 August 2009, Martin-=C3=89ric Racine wrote: >> >> On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 5:54 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki w= rote: >> >> > On Thursday 13 August 2009, Martin-=C3=89ric Racine wrote: >> >> >> 2009/8/13 Martin-=C3=89ric Racine : >> >> >> > On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 12:07 PM, Ingo Molnar= wrote: >> >> >> >> * Martin-=C3=89ric Racine wrote: >> >> >> >>> Yes, this bug is still valid. >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> Ubuntu kernel team member Leann Ogasawara and I are slowly >> >> >> >>> bisecting our way through the changes that took place sinc= e 2.6.30 >> >> >> >>> to find the commit that introduced this regression. Please= stay >> >> >> >>> tuned. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> hm, the only outright Geode related commit was: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> =C2=A0d6c585a: x86: geode: Mark mfgpt irq IRQF_TIMER to pre= vent resume failure >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> the jpg at: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> =C2=A0http://launchpadlibrarian.net/28892781/00002.jpg >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> is very out of focus - but what i could decypher suggests a >> >> >> >> pagefault crash in the VFS code, in generic_delete_inode(). >> >> >> >> >> >> This one might be a bit better: >> >> >> >> >> >> http://launchpadlibrarian.net/30267494/2.6.31-5.24.jpg >> > >> > Hmm. =C2=A0This looks like a sysfs oops to my untrained eye. >> >> The bisect I did with Leann Ogasawara has narrowed the kernel panic >> down to the following: >> >> commit f19d4a8fa6f9b6ccf54df0971c97ffcaa390b7b0 >> Author: Al Viro >> Date: Mon Jun 8 19:50:45 2009 -0400 >> >> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 add caching of ACLs in struct inode >> >> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 No helpers, no conversions yet. >> >> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Signed-off-by: Al Viro > > Weird. If the functions do what their name suggests, i.e. if > inode_init_always() is an always called constructor and if > destroy_inode() is an unconditional destructor then this patch > should have no functional effect on the VFS side. > > It increases the size of struct inode, so if you have some old > module (built to an older version of fs.h) still around it might > corrupt your inode data structure. > > Or the size change might trigger some dormant bug. It might move a > critical inode right into the path of a pre-existing (but not > visibly crash-triggering) data corruption. > > The possibilities on the 'weird bug' front are endless - the > crash/oops itself should be turned into text, posted here and > analyzed. If you mean something else than the large-size snapshot of the whole panic output that was linked earlier in this thread, I'd appreciate instructions on how to turn that crash into text. Martin-=C3=89ric